Search for: "f/n/u Deal" Results 101 - 120 of 242
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Apr 2016, 7:04 am
The Board is presently dealing with an appeal backlog of about 20,000 cases.[2].For some creative, but losing, arguments against obviousness-type double patenting tried by applicants who couldn't or wouldn't file a terminal disclaimer, see Karen's earlier blog post on the subject.[3].The policy might be challenged as arbitrary or capricious, since overcoming provisional rejections can hardly be said to be "necessary" for consideration of any outstanding… [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 12:09 pm by Orin Kerr
Before the 20th century, the details of writs were a really big deal. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am by Ben
2015 - It's been another busy copyright year! [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 7:09 am
Back in 2009 – when the blog was still a Bexis/Herrmann operation – we wrote a catch-all punitive damages post entitled (oddly enough) “On Punitive Damages. [read post]
31 Oct 2015, 4:29 pm
Section 2 of the Representation Agreement Regulationdefines routing management of the adult’s financial affairs as follows:2  (1) For the purposes of section 7 (1) (b) of the Act, the following activities constitute "routine management of the adult's financial affairs":(a) paying the adult's bills;(b) receiving the adult's pension, income and other money;(c) depositing the adult's pension, income and other money in the adult's accounts;(d) opening… [read post]
11 Sep 2015, 3:23 pm by Schachtman
Law reviews are not peer reviewed, not that peer review is a strong guarantor of credibility, accuracy, and truth. [read post]
17 Aug 2015, 6:15 am
Superintendent, supra.The judge therefore held that[n]ot [read post]
20 Jul 2015, 9:07 am by Marty Lederman
It's been almost a year since my last series of posts on the fallout from Hobby Lobby--in particular, on the challenges by nonprofit organizations to the government's augmented religious accommodation. [read post]
30 Jun 2015, 6:52 am by Schachtman
 A party will not be heard to complain, or attack its adversary, about failure to produce materials never requested.[13] Citing Rule 26(a) and its subsections, which deal with the report, and not discovery beyond the report, several cases take a narrow view of disclosure as embodied in the report requirement.[14] In one case, McCoy v. [read post]