Search for: "Doe 35" Results 6661 - 6680 of 16,966
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Nov 2016, 1:28 pm by Sal Lo Monaco
When the PEB receives the MEB findings (usually within 35 days), the PEB determines which of the medical conditions claimed qualify for DoD disability. [read post]
29 Nov 2016, 7:02 am by Dean Freeman
Florida’s dram shop liability law is less favorable to plaintiffs than statutes in other states, but it does allow compensation under a certain set of circumstances. [read post]
29 Nov 2016, 7:02 am by Dean Freeman
Florida’s dram shop liability law is less favorable to plaintiffs than statutes in other states, but it does allow compensation under a certain set of circumstances. [read post]
28 Nov 2016, 2:11 pm by Robert Wernli, Jr.
Under Rule 506, an issuer can sell securities to an unlimited amount of accredited investors and up to 35 non-accredited investors. [read post]
25 Nov 2016, 6:56 am by Gene Quinn
“The fact that PTO canceled the asserted claims after LADS filed its complaint, without more, does not support a finding of frivolousness,” the panel explained. [read post]
22 Nov 2016, 4:46 pm by Audrey A Millemann
The United States Supreme Court is considering whether the doctrine of laches will bar a patent infringement claim filed within the Patent Act’s six-year damage limitations period set forth in 35 U.S.C. [read post]
22 Nov 2016, 8:42 am by Matthew R. Arnold, Esq.
The numbers reveal that the divorce rate is at its lowest level in more than 35 years. [read post]
21 Nov 2016, 12:43 pm by Renae Lloyd
  The issuer may sell to an unlimited number of accredited investors, but to no more than 35 non-accredited investors. [read post]
21 Nov 2016, 9:26 am by Joseph Fishkin
 Or does he want to keep this major component of Obamacare, or some version of it, in place? [read post]
19 Nov 2016, 4:48 am by Gregory B. Williams
Patent No. 6,127,353 (“the ‘353 patent”) are valid but that defendant does not infringe the asserted claims of the ‘353 patent with its ANDA product.[1] Specifically, the Court found in favor of plaintiff Merck and against defendant as to defendant’s asserted affirmative defenses of invalidity of the ‘353 patent based on obviousness-type double patenting and alleged lack of an adequate written description of the invention as required by 35 U.S.C.… [read post]
17 Nov 2016, 4:03 am by Ben
”Having said so, the Court turned to consideration of the French law, and noted how that legislation does not appear to offer a mechanism ensuring that authors are actually and individually informed. [read post]
17 Nov 2016, 1:35 am
 The form and substance of consentThis said, the Court conceded [para 35] that neither Article 2(a) nor Article 3(1) specify the way in which the prior consent of the author must be expressed: those provisions do not require such consent to be necessarily expressed explicitly. [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 4:36 pm by Kevin LaCroix
”   The plaintiff does not, however, identify the “market” on which the Notes trade. [read post]