Search for: "DOES 1-100" Results 1581 - 1600 of 14,020
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Mar 2013, 6:23 am by Tom Cummings
Compensation for loss of use does not require 100% uselessness; compensation for loss of use does, however, require that the loss be permanent and the loss must be for all practical intents and purposes. [read post]
27 Feb 2011, 6:58 am by Moseley Collins
., and DOES 1 through 100, as follows: Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and upon such information and belief allege, that at the times and places mentioned herein, defendants were the agents, servants, and employees of the remaining defendants, and each of them, and each of them were at all times and places mentioned herein acting within the purpose and scope of said agency, service and employment. [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 6:16 am by Tom Cummings
Compensation for loss of use does not require 100% uselessness; compensation for loss of use does, however, require that the loss be permanent and the loss must be for all practical intents and purposes. [read post]
11 May 2021, 8:54 am by Roel van Woudenberg
However, the RPBA seems to only impose constraints on late-file submissions by parties, as does Art. 114(2) EPC, and not by third parties. [read post]
30 Sep 2020, 8:57 am by Daniel Shaviro
DC would invest €100 of equity in DC-Lux, DC-Lux would invest €100 of debt in DC-France, and Luxembourg would issue a PLR misclassifying DC’s stake in DC-Lux as debt (for Lux tax purposes). [read post]
9 Feb 2022, 12:35 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
” Question: does state and federal law about advertising items with intent not to sell them, “rain check” provisions, etc. bear on this question? [read post]
15 Nov 2013, 11:53 am by Arthur F. Coon
  The Commission subsequently met twice, and based on its staff’s advice recommended (1) certification of the FEIR, and (2) approval of KKP’s second alternative proposal to the Board. [read post]
28 Nov 2022, 3:28 am by Dennis Crouch
  An extreme of this is Kirkland & Ellis that has over 100 patent attorneys but does not do any patent prosecution. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 3:57 am by Roel van Woudenberg
"The patent was opposed on the grounds of Articles 100(a) EPC (lack of novelty and lack of inventive step and 100(c) EPC (non-compliance with the requirements of Articles 123(2) and 76(1) EPC).The reasoning of the decision under appeal is in essence the following:— The claims as granted were not objectionable under Article 123(2) or 76(1) EPC. [read post]
5 Jan 2010, 2:33 pm by Rich Shea
Related posts:The Standard Possession Order Part 1 Parental Rights During Visitation Houston Father Wins Custody Appeal [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
A 100(a) thus prejudices the maintenance of the opposed patent as granted. [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 3:40 pm
  B and D tires had failure times below 100% load only at aging times of 8 weeks at 65°C. [read post]