Search for: "Does 1-88"
Results 141 - 160
of 2,104
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Dec 2013, 2:30 pm
(Footnote 1.)* "This analysis does not mean that the Sentencing Commission is trumping the statute. [read post]
30 Aug 2014, 2:55 am
Considerations set out in the reasoning of the decision are that even on the basis of Article 88, paragraph 1, of the OCA sentence 1 termination of the contract leads to cancellation of obligations taken by the parties does not mean that the creditor is deprived of the right to claim compensation for non performance or damages by argument of art. 88, para 1, sentence 2 of the OCA. 2. [read post]
30 Aug 2014, 2:55 am
Considerations set out in the reasoning of the decision are that even on the basis of Article 88, paragraph 1, of the OCA sentence 1 termination of the contract leads to cancellation of obligations taken by the parties does not mean that the creditor is deprived of the right to claim compensation for non performance or damages by argument of art. 88, para 1, sentence 2 of the OCA. 2. [read post]
22 Oct 2020, 4:01 am
Agency Audits: Office of General Services (OGS): Compliance with Executive Order 88 – Energy Efficiency of State Buildings (Follow-Up) (2020-F-18) An audit, covering the period April 1, 2014 to May 13, 2019, found OGS generally had developed targets and plans to contribute toward EO 88 and complied with the guidelines. [read post]
22 Oct 2020, 4:01 am
Agency Audits: Office of General Services (OGS): Compliance with Executive Order 88 – Energy Efficiency of State Buildings (Follow-Up) (2020-F-18) An audit, covering the period April 1, 2014 to May 13, 2019, found OGS generally had developed targets and plans to contribute toward EO 88 and complied with the guidelines. [read post]
13 Jun 2010, 3:01 pm
(G 2/88 [4]). [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 10:19 am
CHIROPRACTIC TREATMENT ■ 88 Cal. [read post]
10 Jan 2020, 2:57 am
Following the Opinion G 1/18 of the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA), Conclusion 1 a) (not yet published in the OJ EPO), this results in the appeal deemed not to have been filed.2. [read post]
6 May 2024, 5:23 am
§§ 1681–88, plus Illinois contract law…. [1.] [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 9:46 am
This release soared to No 1 in the charts in many discerning nations and featured prominently in a number of Best Songs of 2010 lists. [read post]
27 Feb 2007, 4:19 pm
This places Duke's admirable graduation rates at risk, reinforces negative stereotypes, and does not serve the best interests of these students themselves, their peers, or their faculty. [read post]
23 Jul 2009, 5:51 am
Where the government does not show that a Rule 41(g) motion for return of property will interfere with a grand jury investigation, it can be granted. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 5:01 pm
However, the fact that the Board has come to a different conclusion from the department of first instance does not by itself mean that the latter committed a substantial procedural violation (see for example decisions T 87/88; T 538/89, T 182/92) but is rather a matter of judgment, which does not amount to a procedural violation (see for example decision T 182/92 [7] and Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO, 7th edition 2013, IV.E.8.3.5). [read post]
9 Oct 2013, 5:01 pm
T 961/00 [1]. [read post]
14 Feb 2013, 5:01 pm
R 27a does not then apply, because the application does not contain any sequences, despite the fact that the invention refers to nucleotides or amino acids. [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 8:04 am
Ct. 496, 88 L. [read post]
21 Feb 2008, 3:16 am
How many prosecutors comply with R.C.M. 703(d); the defense has to, so does the prosecution; yet they don't. [read post]
13 Aug 2015, 9:49 am
The independent claim of the patent features a generic chemical formula which, due to the variable nature of the described substituents, encompasses a number of alternatives but does not specifically define each alternative. [read post]
25 Apr 2013, 4:47 pm
The revised COPPA Rule takes effect on July 1, 2013. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 5:01 pm
Thus the feature “continuously extending join line” is to be understood as a structural feature of claim 1 and – contrary to the opinion of the patent proprietor – not as a functional feature. [read post]
