Search for: "THU L" Results 1101 - 1120 of 12,820
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Apr 2017, 9:30 pm by Dan Ernst
Rosen received his LLM in Intellectual Property in 2006 from the Law School and later served as the 2015-2016 Abraham L. [read post]
26 Jul 2013, 2:09 pm by Charles (Chuck) Rubin
Liss, Stephen, Rethink the Use of 529 Accounts for Funding College Costs, WG&L Estate Planning Journal, August 2013 Follow @crubincrubin [read post]
24 Aug 2013, 1:30 am by Thaddeus Mason Pope, J.D., Ph.D.
 Here are four sessions related to medical futility:An Aid to Addressing Medical Futility Cases (THU 10/24 2:45-3:45)Carol L. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 4:10 am by Howard Friedman
The alleged disability discrimination thus occurred at a quasi-religious social function, not an educational one. [read post]
16 Nov 2012, 3:40 pm by Sean Patrick Donlan
Thus elevated, we wish you, our readers, near and far, as always: Happy Reading! [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 3:40 am by Timothy P. Flynn
 The Michigan Court of Appeals ruled in Mother's favor that because the deceased biological father's rights were terminated, he was not a "legal parent" of the children thus, the paternal grandparents did not have standing under the grandparenting statute.The lawyer for the grandparents, Phillip L. [read post]
23 Jan 2014, 8:30 am by WSLL
Michael, Wyoming Attorney General; David L. [read post]
19 Jun 2013, 7:01 am
Regular readers know that one major effect of the train wreck has been reduced hours for part-time employees:"[E]ven those fortunate enough to keep their current jobs (let alone obtain new employment) may be subject to reduced hours (and thus pay)"Restaurants and movie theaters, theme parks and community colleges are all slashing employees' hours, if not their jobs. [read post]
9 Jun 2013, 10:31 pm by John L. Welch
And so the Board affirmed the refusal.Read comments and post your comments here.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
11 Jul 2018, 5:42 am by Guido Paola
This petition for review was filed against a decision of the BoA based on two main objections of the petitioner/patent proprietor:(a) the Opposition Division did not allow for a fair debate during opposition proceedings, and did not give reasons in its decision of revoking the patent, on the admissibility of a disclaimer in claim 1, thus depriving the applicant/patent proprietor of the possibility of having this point re-examined in second instance proceedings. [read post]