Search for: "Does 1-41" Results 721 - 740 of 4,586
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Aug 2011, 10:25 am by Nathan Koppel
Or, better, does law blogging feature large in your fantasies? [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 6:47 am by Ted Allen
House of Representatives voted 380-41 to approve final legislation that would exempt newly public companies from say-on-pay votes and various accounting and disclosure rules. [read post]
26 Jun 2008, 2:01 am
  The chain does operate 41 of its own food processing plants to help supply its 2,474 stores in 31 states. [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 3:34 pm
The lawsuit names the prosecutors and sheriffs of every Indiana county and the Indianapolis mayor, since they are responsible for maintaining the registry and prosecuting violations.It filed the suit on behalf of a Marion County man using the name "John Doe" and a Scott County man, Steven Morris, 41, who has convictions for child molesting and sexual misconduct with a minor. [read post]
15 Jun 2012, 5:13 am
The only verifiable information about which the Court can be sure is Defendants did not own the mobile home and they did not stay there the night before the police raided the Property. 1 HR, DN 41 p. 9-10. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 12:54 am by Randall Reese
 Club Ventures does not own any of the real estate where its clubs or executive offices are located (all are leased), but does have pre-bankruptcy debt of approximately $65 million. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 2:04 am by war
So clause 41(2) says “A trade mark is taken not to be capable of distinguishing … only if …. [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 8:46 pm
Conversely, all the other brands mentioned accounted for only 13% of the sample; the highest of these, Lindt, reached 1.7% and no other brand reached 1%. [read post]
”  While the list is by no means exhaustive, it does provide some hot topics for organizations to consider in 2017. 1. [read post]
”  While the list is by no means exhaustive, it does provide some hot topics for organizations to consider in 2017. 1. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 3:57 am by Roel van Woudenberg
Moreover, referring to G 2/98 (OJ EPO 2001, 413, Reasons, points 4, 6.6 and 6.7), the opposition division concluded that the "intermediate generalisation in granted claim 1 with respect to the disclosure of priority document D16 does not give rise to the claiming of a limited number of clearly defined alternative subject-matters" and thus that the "subject—matter of claim 1 was only entitled to the filing date". [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 9:53 am by Susan Brenner
How does/should a court reconcile Rule 41(g) with the government’s pursuit of criminal forfeiture when the property at issue is intangible, and can therefore be copied? [read post]