Search for: "AT&T"
Results 9381 - 9400
of 881,733
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Feb 2024, 10:00 pm
Developers and purchasers should evaluate the laws pertaining to water rights to determine whether a proposed piece of land or property suits their needs. [read post]
10 May 2024, 8:00 am
COMPANY FIRED EMPLOYEES SUFFERING FROM CANCER AND SEIZURESAccording to a lawsuit filed by the U.S. [read post]
10 Jun 2024, 8:00 am
REVEALING DISABILITY TO EMPLOYER LED TO HIS TERMINATIONAfter disclosing that he suffered from a disability and that he might need an accommodation, his employer, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), fired the impacted individual.Believing that such conduct violated the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), the U.S. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 10:00 am
Despite the passage of Florida's Health Care Clinic Act over nine years ago, there are apparently still many health practices which are violating it. [read post]
10 Aug 2023, 11:00 pm
PERSONAL GUARANTY WAS NEVER MODIFIEDWhen she signed a commercial lease for space at 1776 Broadway, in Manhattan, Michelle Corbin-Hillman did so in her capacity as president of her corporate entity. [read post]
27 May 2011, 9:56 pm
A Los Angeles federal judge has ruled that an alleged rape victim does not have standing to sue Match.com, effectively ending her bid to shut down the online dating service until it screens users for sex offenders. [read post]
2 Jan 2010, 11:00 am
[…] The reasons for the contested decision are limited to novelty (it indicates the distinguishing features of claim 1 with respect to the closest prior art) and inventive step (the device not being obvious over D1 to D3). [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 3:02 pm
[5.1] During the oral proceedings (OPs) before the Board, the [patent proprietors], after having been informed that the main request was not considered allowable, pointed out that if the reason for the rejection of the main request was the lack of evidence for a technical effect, then it regarded this finding of the Board as amounting to a fundamental violation of A 113, because the superior technical effect of the claimed screw extruder had not been challenged by the opponent on the basis of any… [read post]
29 Oct 2010, 6:16 am
Not an IP case, just a dispute over royalties from Bay City Rollers. [read post]
1 Jan 2013, 9:02 am
18 Aug 2010, 3:01 pm
Is it possible to request a remittal to the Opposition Division (OD) based on a substantial procedural violation committed against the adverse party, although this party does not wish to have the case remitted? [read post]
14 Sep 2017, 10:01 am
When it comes to driving under the influence (DUI), many people automatically think “alcohol. [read post]
11 Feb 2018, 9:00 pm
If your new vehicle has problems, the California lemon law can protect you from loss. [read post]
24 Mar 2009, 11:13 pm
Said the manager of the New York Palace Hotel to the bell captain on Ash Wednesday. blog advertising blog advertising [read post]
27 Sep 2009, 5:40 pm
In the present case, an International Preliminary Examination Report (IPER) was sent, a communication of the examining division (ED) followed, and then the decision was taken. [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 3:02 pm
Remember R 7/09? [read post]
6 Mar 2011, 8:29 pm
A three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit ruled last week in Zamecnik v. [read post]
3 Sep 2011, 11:01 am
Here is another textbook example of a disclaimer that does not fulfil the requirements established in G 1/03.The patent proprietor filed an appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division to revoke the opposed patent.The Board found the (main) request I to lack novelty over document D1 (prior art under A 54(3)(4)), and auxiliary requests II and III not to comply with A 123(2). [read post]
4 Jul 2016, 4:54 am
CDRC Vienna 2016 – hear from Singapore Team http://ow.ly/8FXp301U2oTFiled under: Conflict [read post]
8 May 2020, 12:15 pm
Civil litigation — Anonymous plaintiff — Dismissal In this consolidated appeal from two civil actions in the Circuit Court for Carroll County, Jane Doe, appellant, challenges the court’s granting of appellees’ motions to dismiss the actions. [read post]
