Search for: "DOES 1-8"
Results 1721 - 1740
of 32,287
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Feb 2008, 6:05 am
IC 24-5-0.5-3(a) has nineteen (yes, 19) different acts that can be a deceptive practice.(1) That such subject of a consumer transaction has sponsorship, approval, performance, characteristics, accessories, uses, or benefits it does not have which the supplier knows or should reasonably know it does not have [read post]
7 Dec 2021, 4:41 pm
So, what does the Bill involve? [read post]
12 Aug 2015, 12:09 pm
An employer that currently does not participate in a registered pension plan can establish a comparable plan prior to its scheduled ORPP enrolment date to qualify for exemption. [read post]
18 Jul 2020, 12:55 am
(Tenants will not be required to repay that money.)In order to qualify, applicants must meet the following criteria:have a primary residence in New York State;must have a household income below 80% of the median income for the county and household size (information available here) for the period March 1, 2020 to the time of the application;more than 30% of the household’s gross monthly income was dedicated to rent for the period March 1, 2020 to the time of the application;… [read post]
18 Jul 2020, 12:55 am
(Tenants will not be required to repay that money.)In order to qualify, applicants must meet the following criteria:have a primary residence in New York State;must have a household income below 80% of the median income for the county and household size (information available here) for the period March 1, 2020 to the time of the application;more than 30% of the household’s gross monthly income was dedicated to rent for the period March 1, 2020 to the time of the application;… [read post]
17 May 2017, 3:03 am
The relevant test consists of the first two parts of the Section 2(a) deceptiveness test, and does not include a materiality requirement. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 6:45 am
§292 [False Marking](TriPharma Against Defendants and Does 1 through 10)78. [read post]
12 Mar 2013, 5:43 pm
§ 41.50(b), we enter a new ground of rejection for claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
21 Oct 2016, 7:53 pm
#debate /1 Does he have actual info revealing why the USIC is wrong? [read post]
25 Apr 2017, 4:47 am
"Page 13, lines 2 to 13"Special cover modules for defining the visual impression of the medication delivery device are shown 7, 8, 9. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 6:06 pm
Thus, the confidentiality language does not specifically reference and restrict information concerning and their jobs. [read post]
12 Apr 2015, 4:46 pm
The BGI singles them out and therefore directly identifies them for the purposes of section 1(1)(a) of the DPA…”. [read post]
15 Jan 2024, 1:30 am
The trade mark consists of a double circular line on the upper portion of which is a stylized butterfly: Relying on a likelihood of confusion pursuant to Art. 8(1)(b) EUTMR and on protection of a trade mark with a reputation according to Art. 8(5) EUTMR, Italian fashion company Cris Conf S.p.A. [read post]
13 Mar 2013, 2:49 am
1. [read post]
21 May 2014, 10:16 am
I doubt it...In the New Mexico case the justices cite a DoJ memorandum that pretty much summarizes what is of concern to the federal government - getting pot into the wrong hands, doing anything with it on federal land or creating a public nuisance or danger.The memo lists 8 areas "of concern" to the DoJ:(1) Preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors;(2) Preventing revenue from the sale of marijuana from going to criminal enterprises, gangs, and cartels;(3)… [read post]
24 May 2015, 5:50 pm
A New York Estate Lawyer explained that, on February 8, 1929, Mr. [read post]
15 Aug 2016, 1:47 pm
(collectively“ScriptPro”) appeal the United States District Court forthe District of Kansas’s grant of summary judgment thatclaims 1, 2, 4, and 8 (“asserted claims”) of U.S. [read post]
23 May 2019, 8:54 am
In an 8-1 decision, the Court upheld the fines.The Court opens by acknowledging that presidential electors perform a “federal function. [read post]
12 Mar 2014, 11:45 am
So the Dutch court's approach seems to be that the exceptions set out in the Directive apply to a broad range of databases, even beyond those which are granted IP protection by the Directive.They therefore asked the CJEU the following question (and thanks to EU Law Radar's Stephen Vousden for the informal translation)Does the scope of the Database Directive also cover online databases that are neither protected in copyright under Chapter II of the Directive nor protected as a sui… [read post]
10 Feb 2024, 11:12 pm
The motion passed, 8 to 3. [read post]
