Search for: "ES v. State"
Results 1161 - 1180
of 1,393
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 May 2011, 7:09 am
Reg. 2021 (Jan. 17, 1992) (The PTO stated that Rule 56 “do[es] not define fraud or inequitable conduct. [read post]
25 May 2011, 11:46 pm
United States, 429 U.S. 17 (1976), and Precision Instruments Manufacturing Co. v. [read post]
22 May 2011, 11:20 pm
These would, or certainly could, include such matters as whether the ES contained sufficient data to enable it to pass muster as a required ES notwithstanding current authority suggesting that the question is a matter of discretion to be decided exclusively by the planning authority. [read post]
19 May 2011, 7:22 am
V argas, Represe nting No ncitizen Crim inal Defe ndants in New Yo rk State , 3d. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 2:43 am
It also found the sounds to be different: the cited mark is likely to be pronounced as "dot nines," whereas Applicant's mark is pronounced "es-nine. [read post]
21 Apr 2011, 9:00 am
” Webster’s Third New Int’l Unabridged Dictionary 1560 (1986); see also United States v. [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 6:58 am
We recommend the recent decision in White v. [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 6:06 am
161/10 eDate Advertising GmbH v X and Olivier Martinez et Robert Martinez v Société MGN Limited. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 12:52 pm
” In Thompson v. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 1:25 pm
” Boardwalk Prop., Inc. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 8:33 am
Jawara v. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 10:30 am
Di Bella v. [read post]
5 Mar 2011, 8:21 am
In Western Watersheds Project v. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 5:52 pm
United States, 816 F.2d 647, 657 (Fed. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 8:47 am
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE KARENA WHERRY et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. [read post]
17 Feb 2011, 9:08 pm
”[6] MPEP § 707.07(f) incorrectly states that an examiner “should” answer all material traversed; it’s a statutory “must. [read post]
11 Feb 2011, 3:30 pm
(So, to the nutbag who refused to cooperate with me in his defense, stating “just do what you attorneys do” while motioning with his hands and dancing a jig, that’s why I called you a nutbag.) [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 7:47 am
University v. [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 7:47 am
University v. [read post]
8 Feb 2011, 3:22 am
”Citing Public Sector Labor and Employment Law [Lefkowitz, Osterman & Townley, published by the New York State Bar Association,], the Court of Appeals observed that “... bargaining is mandatory even for a subject treated by statute unless the statute clearly preempt[s] the entire subject matter or the demand to bargain diminish[es] or merely restate[s] the statutory benefits. [read post]
