Search for: "Does 1 through 20" Results 341 - 360 of 13,650
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Sep 2018, 3:45 pm by Robert Chesney
Let’s have a close look, in context with the recently-enacted NDAA and recent changes to PPD-20. 1. [read post]
23 Apr 2018, 9:16 am by Foran & Foran, P.A.
More Blog Posts: Maryland Court Allows Plaintiff to Proceed in Lead Paint Lawsuit Against Property Owner, Maryland Personal Injury Blog, published August 20, 2016 Maryland Plaintiff Wins Appeal in Lead Paint Case as Court Reverses Summary Judgment Order, Maryland Personal Injury Blog, published June 1, 2017 The post Maryland Court Holds Out-of-State Insurance Policy Excluding Coverage for Lead Exposure Does Not Violate Public Policy appeared first on Maryland Personal… [read post]
22 Feb 2021, 4:00 am by Jon L. Gelman
”The bill was released from the full Senate, by a vote of 23-12.Related ArticlesOSHA: Executive Order on Protecting Worker Health and Safety 1/23/21National Strategy for The COVID-19 Response and Pandemic Preparedness 1/22/21More than half of COVID-19 health care workers at risk for mental health problems 1/20/21Disability for Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19 1/1/21OSHA Temporary Emergency COVID Standard on the Horizon 12/29/20Vaccine… [read post]
29 Sep 2017, 5:22 am by Terry Hart
The issue: “(1) Whether the U.S. [read post]
25 Dec 2023, 10:04 am by Jacob Katz Cogan
(2nd Prize Winner of the Essay Competition 2023) Case-Notes Hugo Varenne & Núria Casas Cano, Latest Twist in the Komstroy Saga The Definition of “Investment” under the ect as Interpreted by the Paris Court of Appeal in Its Second Annulment Decision Trajan Shipley, ‘A Series of Unfortunate Events’ Opinion 1/20 and the Fate of the ect Modernisation Process Dilber Devitre & Prabhjot K. [read post]
15 Nov 2011, 10:56 am by Erik J. Heels
Which philosophy does your business follow? [read post]
13 Mar 2017, 1:39 am by Simon Holzer
The plaintiff claimed that EP 1 200 092 does not have a valid priority and, therefore, lacks novelty in light of the international application WO 01/08686. [read post]
20 Jan 2023, 1:00 am by Rose Hughes
Claim 1 as granted specified a pharmaceutical formulation comprising the therapeutic peptide and propylene glycol. [read post]
5 May 2023, 12:52 pm by Neal Davis
Such crimes can bring punishments of 2 to 20 years in a state prison and a fine of up to $10,000. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 9:08 am by Trey Mills
Many times we see potential clients fail to follow through with a Workers’ Compensation claim because they are “job scared. [read post]
18 Jun 2015, 10:02 am
Indianapolis, Indiana - Trademark lawyers for Imprimis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of California filed an intellectual property lawsuit in the Southern District of Indiana alleging that Hook's Apothecary, Inc. of Indiana, as well as unidentified Doe Defendants 1 through 20, infringed the following Imprimis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. trademarks: GO DROPLESS! [read post]
17 Dec 2010, 5:23 am by Greg Jenner
  The bill made no substantive changes to section 1603; it does not convert the grant into a refundable tax credit. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 10:04 am by Jeralyn
He weighs all the factors, and sets bond at $1 million, which can be met through a bondsman who will charge 10% and noting that the defense fund has $211,000., finds Defendant has the ability to pay it. [read post]
1 Feb 2020, 8:33 pm by Sandy Levinson
 Does anyone have any doubt that Trump would immediately nominate a successor, quite likely Amy Comey Barrett and that Mitch McConnell would do whatever he could to force the nomination through by the New Year? [read post]
9 Feb 2020, 7:04 am by Cannabis Law Group
Marijuana Tax Revenue Expenditures in California (Fiscal Year 2019-2020) Once research and regulatory costs have been addressed, the remainder of funds are dispersed as follows: 60 percent to youth-focused anti-drug programs; 20 percent to environmental conservation; and 20 percent to public safety initiatives. [read post]
23 Feb 2017, 11:11 am by Catherine Brinkley
The Interim Guidance clarifies that future cost savings expected to be achieved through the regulation are not to be counted as offsets to regulatory costs. [read post]