Search for: "DOES 1-8" Results 9121 - 9140 of 32,314
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jul 2019, 6:32 am by James Yang
  However, the new subject matter does not receive the benefit of the filing date of the original patent application. [read post]
5 Jul 2019, 8:13 pm by Bill Marler
It does make you think about proportionality in the criminal justice system. [read post]
5 Jul 2019, 12:39 pm by Mark Theodore and Joshua Fox
  The “safe harbor” does not apply, however, when a rival union has filed an election petition or has intervened in the upcoming representation case. [read post]
5 Jul 2019, 7:16 am by Berry Law Firm
The groups are broken into 8 categories with VA Priority Group 1 being the highest priority and VA Priority Group 8 being the lowest. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 3:07 am by Jan von Hein
AG Szpunar further states that the territorial dimension of an injunction cannot be determined by Articles 1, 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights because the original claim was not based on EU law and was therefore outside the scope of the Charter (para. 89). [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 12:39 pm by Patricia Hughes
(OCA, para.8-9) The OCA relied on the 2014 Supreme Court of Canada decision in Bhasin v. [read post]
As a result, an FCA violation allegation does not carry a presumption of correctness. [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 5:38 am by John Mikhail
  The only recorded vote indicates that it was opposed in the House by a nearly 2-1 margin (32-17). [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 11:44 pm by Roel van Woudenberg
If G 1/18 is applicable, but the case is not stayed as the outcome on the merits of the appeal does not change, can a decision on the reimbursement/refund be made without staying in view of the relevance of G 1/18 on that decision (esp. as refund is not at the discretion of the EPO/Board)? [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 12:29 pm by Rob Robinson
(Chart 1) The ACEDS Blog was noted as a primary source of legal news and thought leadership information by 79% of survey respondents. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 12:13 pm by Elin Hofverberg
Yes, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has said that withdrawing parental rights in response to continuous caning (beating the child with a cane) does not violate article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). [read post]