Search for: "In re Paul"
Results 821 - 840
of 9,381
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jun 2009, 9:42 am
In granting their motion for appointment over another, Judge Paul D. [read post]
1 Dec 2007, 7:35 am
In In re Paul Lew (November 29, 2007, nonprecedential) the Federal Circuit held that substantial evidence supported the Board's determination that Lew's amendments to replace the term "ball bearing" with the broader term "curved member" were not supported by the initial disclosure.According to the nonprecedential opinion by Circuit Judge Gajarasa:. . . the Board properly framed the question as whether Lew's disclosure of only "ball… [read post]
30 Dec 2015, 3:32 am
Federal Circuit court of appeals says government can’t deny trademark as “disparaging” just because it frowns on its expressive content, implications are favorable for Washington Redskins in their legal case [Eugene Volokh, Paul Alan Levy, In Re Simon Shiao Tam opinion, case won by past Overlawyered guestblogger Ron Coleman] Mentally ill man walks into San Diego county recorder’s office, submits properly filled-out deed transferring major sports… [read post]
24 Jul 2016, 7:48 pm
As I've been writing recently, it simply doesn't matter, with regard to achieving the sorely needed progressive agenda, if Hillary Clinton is elected and the Democrats take the Senate if, at the same time, the egregious Paul Ryan continues to remain the Speaker of the House because of illegitimate gerrymandering and a pernicious system of single-member districts sorely in need ion change. [read post]
5 Dec 2014, 10:18 am
This is shooting fish in a barrel, but here is Paul Krugman in December 2010, declaring that “peak oil has arrived. [read post]
21 Oct 2010, 8:05 am
“Though we’re Canadian,” Tarantino writes in an e-mail, “we think U.S. readers might find it of interest as well. [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 7:46 am
For the reasons explained in detail by Mark Bennett and Paul Kennedy and others, they should be roundly defeated.As a Texas attorney, I'd like to vote against them. [read post]
29 Sep 2009, 8:59 am
As Paul has mentioned, he and I (and Ethan) are participating in the "Constitution in 2020" conference and blog-conversation. [read post]
6 May 2007, 12:26 pm
Now they’re back, with a new name. [read post]
10 Sep 2008, 12:55 pm
Over at TaxProf Blog, the indefatigable Paul Caron reports that 95% of the amount in law prof political contributions this year have been to Obama while 5% of the gross has gone to McCain. [read post]
3 Oct 2015, 3:46 pm
Paul Appelbaum, a Columbia University psychiatrist who specializes in researching attacks like yesterday’s. [read post]
11 Jan 2018, 8:24 am
I received a funny email from Paul Morinville’s US Inventor group stating that “Thousands of US inventors are applauding Rep. [read post]
24 May 2009, 4:07 pm
Professor Paul Caron reports on the SubtleDig study(?) [read post]
5 Dec 2014, 10:49 am
Groombridge | Paul WeissPatent litigator Nick Groombridge is a partner in Paul Weiss’s litigation department. [read post]
10 Feb 2009, 6:00 am
You're listening to episode 149 on Tuesday, February 10, 2009. [read post]
15 Nov 2024, 4:16 am
Then Donald Trump got re-elected President. [read post]
8 May 2020, 2:32 am
We care about them because they’re intensely personal and private – but that’s also why they can be valuable to those who wish to exploit or harm us. [read post]
2 Feb 2011, 7:44 pm
On Tablet PCs...I've heard that both the outgoing CEO of AMD (Dirk Meyer) and the current CEO of Intel (Paul Otellini) have taken the position that tablet computers will always be relegated to the status of "companion devices", and will not pose a serious threat to sales of notebook or desktop devices.I think they're wrong. [read post]
2 Feb 2011, 3:44 pm
On Tablet PCs...I've heard that both the outgoing CEO of AMD (Dirk Meyer) and the current CEO of Intel (Paul Otellini) have taken the position that tablet computers will always be relegated to the status of "companion devices", and will not pose a serious threat to sales of notebook or desktop devices.I think they're wrong. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 10:27 am
The rest of the Court seemed to think the constitutionality of the cross was a secondary or non-issue (because of res judicata), and wanted to focus on the land transfer. [read post]
