Search for: "Does 1-27" Results 1781 - 1800 of 12,435
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Jan 2017, 8:17 am by WOLFGANG DEMINO
However, an insurer generally does not have a fiduciary relationship giving rise to a duty to an insured. [read post]
1 Mar 2016, 2:58 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Patent No.7,664,516 (the ’516 patent); claims 7–16 and 23–27 of U.S.Patent No. 8,155,679; claims 1–5 of U.S. [read post]
19 Oct 2018, 6:24 am
In what way does the legitimacy of ICs depend on them protecting or promoting individual autonomy? [read post]
27 Jun 2022, 1:02 pm by Daniel A. Kaplan
This is the first time in more than a decade that the IRS has made a mid-year adjustment to the reimbursement rate; the new rate is effective July 1, with the old rate (58.5¢/mile) applicable for the time period January 1, 2022 – June 30, 2022. [read post]
9 May 2014, 12:00 am
  Claims 28 through 37 were on appeal—claims 1 through 27 were cancelled during prosecution. [read post]
29 Apr 2022, 9:30 am
That presumes that Governor DeSantis does not issue a line item veto on the amounts recommended in the Budget bill. [read post]
19 Feb 2013, 2:44 pm
The Court of Appeals held that wrongful conduct of one of the parents in causing conception does not in any way alter the parental obligation to support the child. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 5:43 am
As Sven Klos remarked, having litigated the same provision of Benelux trade mark law (where the "substantial value" exclusion originates from) for 20 years, he still does not know what it is supposed to mean (and the CJEU's Hauck decision hasn't made this easier, has it). [read post]
13 Nov 2023, 9:04 am by Marcel Pemsel
The application form in Germany does not provide a box for ‘olfactory mark’. [read post]
3 Jan 2024, 5:08 am
Section 2(d) - Likelihood of Confusion: Precedential No. 34: TTAB Dismisses Monster Energy's Section 2(d) Claim On Summary Judgment Due to DIssimilarity of Design Marks Precedential No. 29: After an Exhausting 2(d) Analysis, TTAB Finds HME (Stylized) Confusable with KME for Building Products Precedential No. 27: TTAB Renders Split Decision in Appeal From Section 2(d) Refusal of IMPACT for Various Healthcare Services Precedential No. 12: TTAB Hands Win to MLBPA and Aaron… [read post]
19 Oct 2018, 7:00 am by John Jascob
The Division of Corporation Finance has issued 27 new Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations related to the cross-border exemptions. [read post]
22 Jan 2008, 11:37 pm
As a result, under section 736A(g)(1) of the act, FDA does not have the authority to collect and spend user fees for this purpose. [read post]