Search for: "MATTER OF C A"
Results 7401 - 7420
of 36,786
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2020, 10:00 am
Canada’s Competition Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 3:25 pm
Thus, the relation of the assignment date and the effective filing date can be a critical factor in the abandonment or allowance of an application. 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) states that a disclosure shall not be prior art against a patent if the “subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, were owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person. [read post]
21 Sep 2022, 3:55 pm
Rule 2.420(c)(9)(A)(vi) allows a court to shield a proceeding or record from the public when confidentiality is required to "avoid substantial injury to a party by disclosure of matters protected by a common law or privacy right not generally inherent in the specific type of proceeding sought to be closed. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 3:25 pm
Thus, the relation of the assignment date and the effective filing date can be a critical factor in the abandonment or allowance of an application. 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) states that a disclosure shall not be prior art against a patent if the “subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, were owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 3:25 pm
Thus, the relation of the assignment date and the effective filing date can be a critical factor in the abandonment or allowance of an application. 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) states that a disclosure shall not be prior art against a patent if the “subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, were owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 7:49 am
Pursuant to Village Law § 7-728 (6) (c), a public hearing on the subdivision application must follow the filing of the negative declaration under SEQRA (accord Matter of Kittredge v Planning Bd. of Town of Liberty, 57 AD3d 1336, 1340 [2008]; see Town Law § 276 [6] [c]). [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 10:54 am
I just wish I had the balls for Option C. [read post]
2 Nov 2020, 1:07 am
In the matter of EP./. [read post]
11 Apr 2022, 4:46 am
Specifically, Stile promised to “forever forebear from commencing, prosecuting, and/or participating in, directly or indirectly, any action or proceeding against Heid, Antico, [or C-Air] concerning . . . matter[s] related to the operation and/or business of [C-Air]. [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 9:27 am
Shafer moved for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(10), arguing he did not owe Bitner a duty, and if he did, it was not breached. [read post]
5 Jun 2022, 4:44 pm
§§ 1962(c) & 1962(d); Hacking. 18 U.S.C. [read post]
17 Nov 2015, 12:20 pm
Misinformation regarding the OFCCP’s revised regulations on protected veterans and workers with disabilities is abundant on OFCCP compliance vendor and law firm blogs, according to attorney John C. [read post]
11 Nov 2013, 4:41 am
The panel declined the invitation to provide controlling guidance concerning Rule 17(c) procedures, but did hold that a defendant need not first ask the government for discovery under Rule 16 before subpoenaing evidence under Rule 17(c). [read post]
12 Mar 2015, 1:55 pm
If § 13-905(C) and § 13-906(C) contradict § 13-907 (C), the two former sections rule. [read post]
12 Mar 2015, 1:55 pm
If § 13-905(C) and § 13-906(C) contradict § 13-907 (C), the two former sections rule. [read post]
4 Nov 2023, 5:25 pm
E/C authorized James Smith, M.D. [read post]
11 Mar 2015, 3:30 am
PrioritizeWhat matters most to your practice? [read post]
24 Jul 2019, 4:00 am
O’Connor, 2019 ONSC 4279 [24] The defendant described the case as a “straightforward personal injury matter”. [read post]
28 Mar 2010, 9:24 am
The question is why this should matter. .... [read post]
