Search for: "MATTER OF C B J B"
Results 141 - 160
of 2,718
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Nov 2007, 3:17 am
P. 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 3:18 am
Jan. 29, 2008) (Shadur, J.). [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 5:36 am
It has provided virtually no guidance on what it means for a matter to present a “major question,” it has provided little guidance on what it means for a matter to present a “major question,” it has provided little guidance on the degree of statutory specificity necessary to provide agency authority over a major question . . . . [read post]
29 Dec 2012, 1:05 pm
(b) The bar against the patenting of micro-organisms: The guidelines deal with the patenting of micro-organisms under Section 3(c) and Section 3(j) of the Patent Act. [read post]
4 Jul 2014, 5:27 am
The matter then went to the Supreme Court of Ohio. [read post]
22 Apr 2007, 7:15 am
(c) Conditions for Patentability; Non-Obvious Subject Matter- Section 103 is amended to read as follows: `Sec. 103. [read post]
6 Sep 2022, 4:12 pm
§ 331(j). [read post]
24 Sep 2011, 5:28 am
Attorney Paul J. [read post]
17 Mar 2015, 7:12 am
It has thus satisfied the requirements of Rule 12(b)(6). [read post]
4 Sep 2024, 2:35 pm
Rozbruch, and Lisa J. [read post]
27 Dec 2022, 4:33 pm
Simply put, the CJEU found that a first SPC granted for a single active ingredient A may preclude the subsequent grant of a second SPC for a combination of active ingredients A+B under Article 3(c) if the two SPCs are based on the same patent, if the scope of protection conferred by the first SPC already encompasses the combination of A+B, and if the combination of A+B is not an “independent invention”, i.e., an invention in its own right that is… [read post]
2 Mar 2007, 1:04 am
Blake.In a follow up to an earlier decision which was based in part on matters resolved in the earlier Janus opinion by Judge J. [read post]
13 Jul 2014, 10:51 am
Filed: October 3, 2013Opinion By: Judge Audrey J. [read post]
22 Jul 2012, 4:33 pm
It could be: (a) yes; (b) no, not at all; (c) some parts yes, and some parts no; (d) no, but it will be treated as if it were; and (e) no, but it may affect the parties’ later agreement. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 6:00 am
The C&J-Nabors transaction initially was proposed by a Citi banker to C&J’s CEO, Joshua Comstock. [read post]
1 Dec 2021, 12:13 pm
(E) A test of the hearing and eyesight of the applicant, and of other matters that may be necessary to determine the applicant’s mental and physical fitness to operate a motor vehicle upon the highways, and whether any grounds exist for refusal of a license under this code. (2) (A) Before a class A or class B driver’s license, or class C driver’s license with a commercial endorsement, may be issued or renewed, the applicant shall have in his or her driver… [read post]
9 Nov 2014, 6:46 pm
C. [read post]
10 Jun 2023, 6:30 am
Griffin-Stanco, and Jason B. [read post]
10 Jun 2023, 6:30 am
Griffin-Stanco, and Jason B. [read post]
14 Jun 2023, 5:52 am
" Turning to the Restatement (Second) of Agency, the Board looked at:[T]he following matters of fact, among others, are considered: (a) the extent of control which, by the agreement, the master may exercise over the details of the work; (b) whether or not the one employed is engaged in a distinct occupation or business; (c) the kind of occupation, with reference to whether, in the locality, the work is usually done under the direction of the employer or… [read post]
