Search for: "Does 1 Through 35"
Results 761 - 780
of 4,646
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jul 2017, 11:33 pm
Supp. 2d 726, 734-35 (E.D. [read post]
29 Mar 2019, 5:24 pm
United States, 221 U.S. 1 (1911) came down. [read post]
1 Nov 2010, 7:30 am
If Congress does not pass new estate tax legislation this year, estates valued at over $1 million will be subject to taxes of up to 55 percent starting on January 1, 2011. [read post]
9 Nov 2016, 9:01 am
Notes:[1] W. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 5:43 am
§ 299(a)(1). [read post]
14 May 2007, 9:40 pm
All too often we talk about the Supreme Court as if the words it uses described the things it does. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 3:07 am
§ 203) permits authors of copyright works and their statutory successors to terminate any contracts the authors executed on or after January 1, 1978, that grant copyrights in the authors’ works, and recapture ownership of such rights in the U.S. after a period of approximately 35-40 years has elapsed (a substantially shorter period than the full copyright term consisting of the life of the author plus 70 years). [read post]
27 Jan 2015, 6:49 am
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released its revised Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101 on Dec. 16, 2014. [read post]
6 Mar 2019, 12:24 pm
Claim 1 of the first auxiliary request differs from claim 1 of the main request in that "environment" has been replaced with "building structure".XI. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 11:21 am
Question 1: Does the law mandate that employers provide insurance to their employees? [read post]
3 May 2021, 7:27 am
Does Lewis v. [read post]
28 Apr 2009, 5:30 am
Edwards p. 35 5. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 12:00 pm
IOM Report Conclusion 7-1.The thresholds [for device approval] should be stringent enough to satisfy the agency’s objective of ensuring that marketed medical devices will be safe and effective throughout their life cycles. [read post]
23 Oct 2023, 5:54 am
Because the benefits are diffuse, political support for the policies does not match the benefit created. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 4:19 pm
And, if so, does everyone agree where that “right place” is? [read post]
1 Aug 2013, 5:01 pm
This is a revocation appeal.Claim 1 of the main request before Board 3.3.04 read:1. [read post]
24 Oct 2013, 8:18 pm
§ 1295(a)(1).Ultramercial at *4 (text added). [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 5:59 pm
Remember, this is pre-Havana: / 1 The transcript follows below. [read post]
13 Jun 2016, 7:39 am
The opinion notes that an ex post defense generated for litigation is does not remove culpability. [read post]
7 Jan 2008, 5:36 am
Patent No. 4,739,762 (below) was added during reexamination was invalid because, in its view, claim 44 was not added "(1) to distinguish the invention as claimed from the prior art" or "(2) in response to a decision adverse to the patentability of a claim of a patent" as required by 35 USC Section 305. [read post]
