Search for: "State v. C. S. S. B."
Results 8781 - 8800
of 15,310
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Dec 2013, 6:12 am
§201.57(c)(6)(i) (emphasis added). [read post]
18 Dec 2013, 1:01 pm
The case is captioned Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. [read post]
Motorola v. ITC: Possibility that Prior Art Encompasses Claimed Feature Not Enough to Show Inherency
18 Dec 2013, 2:18 am
The Commission concluded that “the evidence shows that Microsoft has made significant and/or sub- stantial investments . . . related to the development” of its operating systems satisfying each of § 337(a)(3)(A), (B), and (C). [read post]
17 Dec 2013, 11:57 pm
This could affect a judge’s ruling on a motion to dismiss and a jury’s view of a case if it went to trial. [read post]
17 Dec 2013, 11:00 am
Jou v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 8:05 pm
Related posts:Annotation on ECJ Judgment in “FBTO Schadeverzekeringen” German Annotation on Referring Decision in FBTO Schadeverzekeringen N.V. v Jack Odenbreit (C-463/06) Choice of forum in bills of lading before Greek courts [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 10:22 am
Sprauve v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 9:38 am
”Some premises are excluded from the right to manage by s,72(6) and Sch.6.Section 73 tells us what an RTM company is:“(1) This section specifies what is a RTM company.(2) A company is a RTM company in relation to premises if—(a) it is a private company limited by guarantee, and(b) its articles of association state that its object, or one of its objects, is the acquisition and exercise of the right to manage the premises. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 9:38 am
”Some premises are excluded from the right to manage by s,72(6) and Sch.6.Section 73 tells us what an RTM company is:“(1) This section specifies what is a RTM company.(2) A company is a RTM company in relation to premises if—(a) it is a private company limited by guarantee, and(b) its articles of association state that its object, or one of its objects, is the acquisition and exercise of the right to manage the premises. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 9:27 am
Case Name: JOHN C. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 7:44 am
C. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 6:27 am
Autorité des marchés financiers, 2013 SCC 63, R. v. [read post]
14 Dec 2013, 9:18 pm
., Inc. v. [read post]
14 Dec 2013, 1:35 am
Based on the attorney’s answers, if X+A are married, and they cohabit with B then C then D, there will be no prosecution. [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 5:01 am
The decisionThe IPO’s decision focused on the words of section 3(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1994, which states that “trade marks which are devoid of any distinctive character” -- an absolute bar to registration that comes from Article 3(1)(b) of the Trade Mark Directive and is paralleled in Article 7(1)(b) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation.The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Case C-37/03 BioID… [read post]
11 Dec 2013, 7:55 pm
See Novo Nordisk A/S v. [read post]
11 Dec 2013, 6:15 am
Mulhall v. [read post]
11 Dec 2013, 5:50 am
New York State have unknowingly been videotaped while engaging in sexual relations. [read post]
10 Dec 2013, 7:59 pm
A judgment on an uncontested claim delivered in a Member State shall, upon application at any time to the court of origin, be certified as a European Enforcement Order if:(a) the judgment is enforceable in the Member State of origin; and (b) the judgment does not conflict with the rules on jurisdiction as laid down in sections 3 and 6 of Chapter II of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001; and (c) the court proceedings in the Member State of origin met the… [read post]
10 Dec 2013, 10:35 am
As the Court explored that issue, it became increasingly apparent that the Justices appreciated that, because it is not possible to blame State A or State B in precise portions for endangering the environment in State C or State D, maybe the EPA should be allowed a healthy amount of discretion to devise a plan. [read post]
