Search for: "Does 15-96"
Results 841 - 860
of 1,000
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 May 2010, 7:25 pm
LEXIS 10381, at *15 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
20 May 2010, 6:37 pm
It imported and offered 144 bottles for sale in Australia. 15 bottles were sold after 7 May 2004 but prior to the transfer of the registered trade mark from Barefoot Cellars to Gallo on 17 January 2005. [read post]
19 May 2010, 4:36 pm
Mike Wendy and I have just released a new PFF white paper, “The Constructive Alternative to Net Neutrality Regulation and Title II Reclassification Wars. [read post]
12 May 2010, 12:31 pm
More than a decade later the January 21, 1997 "confidential settlement" of a case involving the stomping of a cameraman during a January 15, 1997 NBA game resurfaces. [read post]
9 May 2010, 6:04 pm
’ Proposed Findings and Conclusions at ¶ 99 n. 15. [read post]
7 May 2010, 3:41 pm
If the applicant does not prove the case, no protection order is made.3. [read post]
6 May 2010, 9:47 am
Jan. 15, 2010). [read post]
25 Apr 2010, 4:27 pm
N.J.A.C. 12:15-1.7 (2009), CHAPTER SCOPE, Definitions. 6. [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 8:19 am
Your use of this blog does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Phillip J. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 3:19 am
The top 32 countries are responsible for 96%. [read post]
10 Apr 2010, 9:48 pm
The impact of such events is taken into account in the same manner as pre-existing conditions: Barnes at para. 96. [read post]
2 Apr 2010, 4:37 am
The NMB’s long list of control factors, though now an established feature of the agency’s precedent, does not provide precise guidance on questions of carrier control. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 11:21 pm
., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295 at paras. 94, 96. [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 7:34 am
In particular, the problem of Fry J's well-known five probanda in Willmott v Barber (1880) 15 Ch D 96, at 105, which has bedevilled this area in the past, is again at stake here because eg it was not known whether the Defendants' predecessor in title had made a mistake as to his legal rights (probanda 1). [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 7:34 am
In particular, the problem of Fry J's well-known five probanda in Willmott v Barber (1880) 15 Ch D 96, at 105, which has bedevilled this area in the past, is again at stake here because eg it was not known whether the Defendants' predecessor in title had made a mistake as to his legal rights (probanda 1). [read post]
21 Mar 2010, 3:50 am
Shri Anuj Sharma 15. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 4:01 pm
T 488/94, T 169/96 and T 345/98). [read post]
17 Mar 2010, 9:20 pm
Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (1992), 96 D.L.R. (4th) 123, 72 B.C.L.R. (2d) 201 (C.A.) [read post]
16 Mar 2010, 7:34 pm
What implications does this have on the health care system? [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 3:02 pm
It is in conformity with the practice of the EPO that at the stage of the examining proceedings the applicant can file a main request and one or more auxiliary requests in view of amending its application (see T 79/89, T 169/96, T 1105/96 and Legal Advice 15/05). [read post]
