Search for: "D, Otherwise C. v. C" Results 141 - 160 of 4,609
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Mar 2024, 1:46 am by Rose Hughes
 However, lack of clarity is not a ground of opposition, unless the lack of clarity arises as a result of post-grant amendments giving rise to new clarity issues (G 3/14, EPO Guidelines for Examination, D-V-5). [read post]
13 Mar 2024, 4:00 am by Michael Woods and Gordon LaFortune
The United States considered this to be contrary to paragraph 3(c) of Section A of Canada’s TRQ Appendix (“Paragraph 3(c)”) which provides: Canada shall allocate its TRQs each quota year to eligible applicants. [read post]
12 Mar 2024, 2:40 pm
In particular, the parties agree that courts should disregard choice-of-law clauses in otherwise valid maritime contracts when the chosen law would contravene a controlling federal statute, see Knott v. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 12:47 pm
Readers are requested to notify the Reporter ofDecisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 6:41 am by Unknown
Governance agreements frequently have a statutory grounding in a section of the DGCL (for example, stockholder agreements are rooted in Section 218(c) and (d)). [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 1:43 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
They’d look for some little snippet of text in the Lanham Act; Scalia was a textualist but he could read a law in its entirety. [read post]
18 Feb 2024, 5:29 pm by Franklin C. McRoberts
Sections 706 (d) and 716 (c) of the Business Corporation Law (the “BCL”) both contain a “for cause” standard for judicial removal of corporate directors and officers. [read post]