Search for: "Matter of Lee v Lee"
Results 1381 - 1400
of 2,324
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jan 2014, 9:01 pm
Kelly falling on her sword and taking the heat on this matter? [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 2:34 pm
Schs. v. [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 10:03 am
Lee, 720 F.3d 96, 103 (2d Cir.2013) . [read post]
1 Jan 2014, 10:01 am
See KSR Int'l Co. v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 11:41 pm
An appeal of the Australian decision (in favour of Myriad’s claims) was heard by a panel of five judges of the Federal Court in August.In the realm of software and ‘business method’ patents, the Australian Federal Court upheld one Patent Office decision to reject claims on the basis that they were not directed to patent-eligible subject matter, and overturned another. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 8:38 am
See, e.g., Matter of Douglas, 26 I&N Dec. 197 (BIA 2013)(child citizenship rights); Matter of E-S-I-, 26 I&N Dec. 136 (BIA 2013)(rights of incompetent respondents); and Matter of Lee (E-2 spouse's statutory right of employment authorization without need to apply for a work permit). [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 5:38 am
See, e.g., Matter of Douglas, 26 I&N Dec. 197 (BIA 2013)(child citizenship rights); Matter of E-S-I-, 26 I&N Dec. 136 (BIA 2013)(rights of incompetent respondents); and Matter of Lee (E-2 spouse’s statutory right of employment authorization without need to apply for a work permit). [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 8:38 am
See, e.g., Matter of Douglas, 26 I&N Dec. 197 (BIA 2013)(child citizenship rights); Matter of E-S-I-, 26 I&N Dec. 136 (BIA 2013)(rights of incompetent respondents); and Matter of Lee (E-2 spouse's statutory right of employment authorization without need to apply for a work permit). [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 9:01 pm
ACLU v. [read post]
21 Dec 2013, 4:31 am
” Touby v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 6:36 am
Moreover, with respect to that one of the two options a RFRA claim is virtually foreclosed by the Court’s unanimous 1982 decision in United States v. [read post]
15 Dec 2013, 5:05 pm
He wrote in State v. [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 2:36 am
Are the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood cases about employee health insurance plan coverage of contraception, writ large, or—as the plaintiffs in those two cases would have it—“only” about coverage of “abortifacients,” or about four discrete forms of birth control? [read post]
11 Dec 2013, 8:02 pm
That's what I just learned from a report by Youkyung Lee of the Associated Press, which is consistent with another one (less detailed at this stage) by Reuters' Miyoung Kim. [read post]
10 Dec 2013, 10:53 am
In today’s case (Lee v. [read post]
10 Dec 2013, 9:25 am
Patient reviews matter. [read post]
8 Dec 2013, 6:08 pm
Lee as Mr. [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 4:34 pm
See Corporation of Presiding Bishop v. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 8:39 am
Lee (1982), as interpreted by Hernandez v. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 3:04 pm
In United States v. [read post]
