Search for: "Doe 35"
Results 6981 - 7000
of 17,238
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Feb 2015, 2:31 pm
Since the UK taxes reduce earnings, ED-Co would have $186 of FSI, and at a 19% rate would owe $35.34 of US tax at the 19% rate,Step 2: Ah, but the proposal does indeed do something rather like allowing foreign tax credits. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 1:21 pm
at 35. [read post]
28 Apr 2013, 6:07 am
Where does trash go? [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 11:06 am
Based on the underlying fact findings, whether a claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
28 Jan 2016, 7:03 am
As Funk notes, prior user rights under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
2 Feb 2018, 8:59 am
The possibility of Court enforcement does not change this fact. [read post]
16 Oct 2014, 1:16 pm
[…] this court addressed infringement, under section 271(e)(2)(A), of the same patent at issue in Elan, by the same generic drug at issue in Elan, but for a different does of that drug. [read post]
15 Jan 2011, 11:08 am
A state court does not have discretion to determine the applicability of the federal Indian Child Welfare Act or this chapter to a child custody proceeding based upon whether an Indian child is part of an existing Indian family.[21] Based upon this language, it does not appear that Iowa has or will adopt the existing Indian family doctrine. [read post]
5 Feb 2013, 7:06 am
But 35 years on 13 charges seems excessive. [read post]
17 Aug 2015, 7:51 pm
For example:“Pursuant to N.J.S.A.2C: 35-19, the defendant through attorney, Kenneth A. [read post]
8 Sep 2015, 3:26 pm
Although, as Dynamicnotes, the patent in Technology Licensing was entitled tothe presumption of validity under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
22 Nov 2019, 1:01 am
The board does not share the views of the Examining division, and concludes that the claim has sufficient technical elements that improve the security of the hardcopy certificate. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 8:55 pm
Patent 7,013,284 (the “’284 patent”) are invalid under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
31 Jan 2013, 3:07 am
Two days ago, Judge Koh delivered four Orders (which can be found here and here) which address these motions.D as definiteness: Samsung's claims of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
10 Dec 2016, 11:31 am
" 35 USC § 102(a) and (b). [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 12:31 am
Over to Nick.Abstract and Observations The question presented in Alice was whether claims directed to a computer-implemented scheme for mitigating “settlement risk” are patent eligible under 35 U. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 9:37 pm
“The fact that Rule 18 permits the joinder of certain claims does not answer the question of how those claims should be adjudicated. [read post]
14 Nov 2017, 2:27 am
For instance the signature of a witness does not indicate assent or an intention to be bound, but instead is intended to verify the signature of the party to the document.)7. [read post]
14 Nov 2017, 2:27 am
For instance the signature of a witness does not indicate assent or an intention to be bound, but instead is intended to verify the signature of the party to the document.)7. [read post]
24 Dec 2009, 6:29 am
Subsection (b) (the assault and battery or physical contact harassment section) deals with touchings or threats to touch, and it does not require the intended victim to be annoyed or alarmed. [read post]
