Search for: "MATTER OF M R W" Results 101 - 120 of 1,340
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Sep 2016, 4:15 am by SHG
[W]e agree with Janice R. that any change in the meaning of “parent” under our law should come by way of legislative enactment rather than judicial revamping of precedent. [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 8:49 pm by TDot
—===— From the law:/dev/null competition-related archives: Going out on a W (04/01/12) [this post] Greetings from Washington (briefly)! [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
In the matter of AR (Children) (Scotland), heard 13 May 2015. [read post]
2 Nov 2015, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
In the matter of AR (Children) (Scotland), heard 13 May 2015. [read post]
27 Mar 2010, 9:26 pm by Buce
I'm not as worked up as some people over the deFrumming of the American Enterprise Institute. [read post]
19 Dec 2010, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
The ED argued that the term 1/2 R(0,m) + R(m) was an essential feature of the invention because it was stated in the description of the parent application as originally filed: “The sum of quantities 1/2 R(0,m) and R(m) is the coning compensation and corresponds to the integration of the second and third terms in equation (2). [read post]
12 Aug 2016, 10:30 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  If you can make the good/bad distinction coherent that would be helpful.A: that’s what I’d like, w/r/t things like “reverse merger. [read post]
23 Oct 2015, 7:13 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
In the matter of AR (Children) (Scotland), heard 13 May 2015. [read post]
16 Oct 2015, 8:03 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
In the matter of AR (Children) (Scotland), heard 13 May 2015. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
In the matter of B (A child), heard 8-9 December 2015. [read post]