Search for: "In re I.S."
Results 1861 - 1880
of 13,491
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Dec 2011, 3:12 pm
Realize that if someone out there is reading your blog, that person may be reading other blogs within your industry (i.e. your competitors). [read post]
14 May 2018, 8:51 am
by Dennis Crouch In re ZTE (Fed. [read post]
13 Nov 2010, 8:10 am
UNCOUPLE YOUR PRESENT VALUE FROM WHAT YOU MADE LAST YEAR your present compensation serves as a powerful anchor of your value to your employer's advantage the following suggestions are a way of re-anchoring that value so that your starting point is greater than what you made this year recalibrate your value according to what you are worth in your employer's hands, i.e., what does your employer save or make based upon the work you do (this may require research on… [read post]
17 May 2011, 6:31 pm
See n re Tiffin, 448 F.2d 791, 792 (CCPA 1971); In re Hiniker, 150 F.3d 1362, 1369 (Fed. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 12:07 pm
,"Come on, you've got to let us at least challenge our inclusion on the list, including at least telling us whether we're in fact on it or not" -- as well as (most likely) substantive ones (i.e., "Remove us from the list. [read post]
10 Mar 2012, 10:19 am
It's easy to say "I'm sorry" in the sorry-if-you-are-offended form, i.e., a nonapology. [read post]
1 Jan 2008, 10:10 am
Meanwhile, the grandma looks like she needs to re-read the manual. [read post]
22 May 2014, 6:00 am
This advance notice gives the landlord the opportunity to begin planning for the marketing and re-letting of the premises. [read post]
10 Dec 2010, 2:47 am
As discussed here and here, In re: Katherine K. [read post]
4 Jun 2010, 5:00 am
Here are some recent stories that I found interesting: The Auditors And Financial Regulatory Reform: That Dog Don’t Hunt by Francine McKenna in re: The Auditors The firms are broken and their basic product is worthless. [read post]
7 Mar 2008, 4:56 am
Needless to say, many pundits are now commenting on the rules of the Democratic Party re the selection of its presidential candidate. [read post]
26 Feb 2008, 4:19 am
In re Motor Fuel, at 3. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 11:24 am
You're entitled to your opinion, and to your agenda, but not to your own facts. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 12:42 pm
But from informal contacts with members of the Audio Division staff, we have heard that that’s how they’re planning to handle things, at least as of now. [read post]
8 Jan 2010, 4:00 am
It covers a lot of topics that aren't well covered in many paid search forums (i.e. account structure). [read post]
6 Aug 2008, 12:01 pm
In re Apollo Group, Inc. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 5:08 am
Re St. [read post]
10 Jun 2016, 4:47 am
They’re going to have an agenda. [read post]
26 Feb 2020, 3:12 am
Again, since the registration was not limited to any particular trade channel, the Board held that, when a company sells to third parties for re-sale under the third parties’ marks rather than under the manufacturer's mark, that circumstance cripples any attempt to show that consumers uniquely associate the mark with one source, i.e., the manufacturer. [read post]
14 Nov 2014, 9:01 am
The Board, examining the ambiguous translation, was unable to reach a conclusion as to its meaning, and remitted the case back to the Examining Division “for re-consideration of the issue of inventive step in the light of a certified translation of D1. [read post]
