Search for: "Does 1-24" Results 1641 - 1660 of 16,594
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Mar 2022, 1:01 pm
"Nor does it take full consideration of the history and complexity of the current crisis. [read post]
10 Oct 2020, 11:18 am by Kenneth S. Nankin
§ 41713(b)(1), the ADA’s preemption provision, preempted this claim because it constituted the plaintiff’s improper attempt to expand her contractual relationship with Delta by relying on the airline’s separate subscription services contract with [24]7. [read post]
H-1B1 and Canadian Exceptions The June 24, 2020, Proclamation does not apply to H-1B1 visa applications for Chile and Singapore nationals. [read post]
7 Mar 2015, 9:26 pm
” Col. 1 ll. 24-30.Id. at *7.The Prosecution HistoryThe prosecution history bolsters the district court’s construction that the term “personal identification num- ber” is a number associated with the user, not the device. [read post]
25 Feb 2020, 3:08 am
Because in such an application the mark has not yet been used [or the applicant is not claiming use of the mark], and because ownership of a mark arises through use of the mark, Section 1(b) does not refer to “the owner of a trademark,” as does Section 1(a) of the Trademark Act which deals with use based applications.As the Board recently held in Norris v. [read post]
14 Dec 2019, 10:57 am by Jon L. Gelman
Read more » NJ Appellate Division (Published Decisions) 1. [read post]
27 Aug 2018, 3:11 pm by Afro Leo
  The court then concluded that a sign consisting of a colour applied to the sole of a high-heeled shoe, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, does not consist exclusively of a ‘shape’, within the meaning of article 3(1)(e)(iii).CommentIt might not be putting it too strong to simply say that rational thought prevailed in this long-running dispute. [read post]
31 Jan 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
Therefore, the board in exercising its discretion pursuant to Article 12(4) RPBA decides not to admit document N33 into the appeal proceedings. [24] Document N39 was filed by the [opponent] in reply to the board’s communication under Article 15(1) RPBA and thus, it represents an amendment to the [opponent’s] case in the sense of Article 13(1) RPBA. [read post]
9 Apr 2016, 2:55 am
The Board drew a distinction between 7(1)(c) and 7(1)(d). [read post]
19 Apr 2018, 3:00 am by Harry Larson
Obama, where the court’s decision on habeas relief turned on an arguably similar question, namely whether the detainee qualified “as ‘medical personnel’ within the meaning of Article 24 of the First Geneva Convention and Section 3-15(b)(1)-(2) of the Army detention regulation. [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 3:02 pm by Oliver G. Randl
It has been decided that an Examining Division (ED) does not commit a substantial procedural violation when it fails to follow the Guidelines, unless it also violates a rule or principle of procedure governed by the EPC or one of the implementing regulations (T 42/84 [9]; T 647/93 [4.1]): the failure of a department of the EPO to follow a procedure set out in the Guidelines does not qualify as a substantial procedural violation as the Guidelines are not legally binding (J… [read post]
25 May 2012, 7:21 pm by Law Lady
Shinseki, 20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal Health Law 7, Westlaw Journal Health Law May 24, 2012 Courts cannot order the U.S. [read post]
27 May 2008, 10:04 pm
This is not the total number of applicants, as the statistic does not include applicants without JDs and from foreign law schools. [read post]
5 Aug 2016, 3:50 pm by Bill Marler
Of those ill people, 24 were infected with Salmonella Reading, 1 was infected with Salmonella Abony, and 5 were infected with both. [read post]