Search for: "In Re Norris" Results 61 - 80 of 330
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Oct 2009, 6:32 pm
But if we’re to approach this hobby honestly, we need to be willing to fact-check our friends and neighbors on Blog Country as well — even when those bloggers are ideological fellow-travelers and online friends. [read post]
22 Jul 2008, 5:06 pm
Don't forget that we always are looking to showcase noteworthy posts, so if you've got something you're proud of, send it to rob [at] lexblog [dot] com. [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 8:08 am by SOIssues
"As long as we know what they're doing, where they're living, where they're working and what kind of potential threat they might be - that's what we're working to do. [read post]
5 Aug 2013, 11:51 am
Gary Watt of Archer Norris explains how both attorney and client can benefit from oral argument, even if changing the panel's mind is not in the stars. [read post]
17 Aug 2022, 5:00 pm
And to that end, we’re honored that the short was selected to screen at CINEQUEST FILM FESTIVAL – voted “Best Film Festival” by USA Today readers. [read post]
6 Oct 2018, 7:17 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
” In re Cordua, 823 F.3d at 602 (internalquotation marks and citation omitted).The TTAB improperly narrowed the genus of thegoods at issue. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 5:50 pm by Colin O'Keefe
As we move on, we’re still seeing a lot of looks back—but even more looks ahead at what 2015 means for the law. [read post]
8 Apr 2013, 12:49 pm by Eric
“We are excited to launch the clinic, and we’re thrilled that a lawyer as experienced and talented as Laura will lead the way,” said Professor Eric Goldman, director of the law school’s High Tech Law Institute. [read post]
31 May 2020, 3:37 pm by Alex Woolgar
The first instance judge (then Mr Justice Norris; now Sir Alastair Norris for the remitted hearing) felt he was faced with a binary choice: maintain the specifications in this respect, or adopt a categorisation system that may result in an unfair pruning. [read post]
26 Sep 2008, 8:51 am
Tromans quotes Mr Justice Bennett in Norris v Norris: "A spouse can, of course, spend his or her money as he or she chooses, but it is only fair to add back in to that spouse's assets the amount by which he or she recklessly depletes the assets and thus potentially disadvantages the other spouse within ancillary relief proceedings". [read post]