Search for: "Matter of S. G. v B. G."
Results 101 - 120
of 2,547
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Oct 2023, 1:23 am
The same documents D20 and D21 as used in the opposition proceedings concerning the patent in suit were invoked against the subject-matter of the application in suit. [read post]
3 Oct 2023, 8:56 am
See Matter of B-Z-R-, 28 I. [read post]
26 Sep 2023, 11:19 am
” Arizona v. [read post]
25 Sep 2023, 6:05 am
From Khan v. [read post]
21 Sep 2023, 7:20 am
Their discussion of Florida’s important Porter decision [ Tampa Maid Seafood Products v. [read post]
19 Sep 2023, 10:30 pm
“Fondements mêmes de l’ordre juridique communautaire”; Kadi, para. 304) comprise today: a) the primacy of the EU law that undergirds the autonomy of the law of integration; b)institutional balance established by the Treaties; c) the judicial review and the Court’s function of the guardian of Union legality under Article 19 TEU; d) the protection of fundamental rights; e) liberty; f) democracy; g) rule of law. [read post]
16 Sep 2023, 6:44 am
(v) Counsel fees and costs. 23 Pa.C.S. 5323(g) Assuming the judge thought this was contempt-worthy let’s review those remedies. [read post]
14 Sep 2023, 10:57 am
The BIA determined that Avila’s PSG did not “exist independently” of the harm alleged, as required under Matter of M-E-V-G-113 and Matter of W-G-R-. 114 Matter of M-E-V-G- cites to this Court’s prior precedent in Lukwago v. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 11:46 am
” Alex G., veterans advocate “The work you do is very valuable to me as a non-lawyer/business owner and student of matters political/judicial. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 12:59 am
Particularly, under Novartis v. [read post]
6 Sep 2023, 7:00 am
He was disbarred and ordered to pay costs, and the matter was referred to the Attorney General for possible criminal prosecution. [read post]
6 Sep 2023, 6:00 am
Employer business changes hands In the matter of Manthadi v ASCO Manufacturing, the employee, who was 69-years-old at the time of the hearing, started working for her previous employer (referred to as “637”) in 1981. [read post]
6 Sep 2023, 6:00 am
Employer business changes hands In the matter of Manthadi v ASCO Manufacturing, the employee, who was 69-years-old at the time of the hearing, started working for her previous employer (referred to as “637”) in 1981. [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 6:57 am
SME Steel Contractors, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Sep 2023, 2:46 pm
Dustin B. [read post]
4 Sep 2023, 12:17 pm
The case is called Greenberg v. [read post]
1 Sep 2023, 9:50 am
[Defendant] represents that he may be opposing the [plaintiff]’s request for a [g]et. [read post]
27 Aug 2023, 3:56 pm
In fact, such conduct is strictly forbidden for federal officials under the Hatch Act and as a matter of Justice Department policy. [read post]
25 Aug 2023, 6:22 pm
Dec. 6, 2022); see also Horwin v. [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR Article 78 to review a determination of the Town terminating the plaintiff [Employee] based on the findings and recommendation of a disciplinary hearing officer, Supreme Court [a] denied the Town's motion to dismiss the Employee petition; [b] granted Employee's petition to the extent of annulling the penalty imposed; and [c] remitting the matter to the Town for the imposition of a less severe penalty. [read post]
