Search for: "In re: B "
Results 61 - 80
of 30,015
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jul 2015, 12:28 pm
That opposition brief should reveal both (a) whether they intend to re-litigate the determination of death, and (b) why they think that is warranted. [read post]
30 Dec 2019, 8:43 pm
It was a year of product launches, re-brands and realignments. [read post]
25 May 2011, 9:20 am
Not recommended for publication in the official reports. 2010AP2023 In re the Petition of [...] [read post]
8 May 2014, 8:20 pm
District Judge Consuelo B. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 8:04 am
In re Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and others: [2011] EWCA Civ 1413; [2011] WLR (D) 352 “A contract for repair or replacement only in the event of breakdown or malfunction which did not oblige the insurer to indemnify the insured for costs which the insured himself incurred fell within paragraph (b) of class 16 Schedule I to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001.” WLR Daily, 29th November 2011… [read post]
7 May 2008, 11:34 pm
Trustee must file its “ten day statement” regarding supposed abuse of chapter 7 as a prerequisite to any 707(b) motion, whether the motion is based upon the means test (707(b)(2)) or the “totality of the circumstances” (707(b)(3)). [read post]
5 Dec 2007, 6:11 am
The CAFC noted that on 12(b)(6) motions, the law of the regional circuit is applied, citing Phonometrics, 203 F.3d 790.The In re Garner case involved an issue of priority. [read post]
15 May 2012, 5:00 am
In In re BP p.l.c. [read post]
28 Dec 2011, 9:34 am
See In re Conseco Life Ins. [read post]
2 Feb 2011, 1:33 am
In re Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and others [2011] EWHC 122 (Ch); [2011] WLR (D) 28 “A contract for repair or replacement only in the event of breakdown or malfunction which did not oblige the insurer to indemnify the insured for costs which the insured himself incurred fell within para (b) of class 16 Schedule 1 to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001. [read post]
8 Oct 2008, 4:00 pm
We are discussing In re Lear, an opinion by VC Strine. [read post]
11 Jun 2008, 2:18 pm
The Lords have given quite an interesting judgment today on the standard of proof in care proceedings under the Children Act 1989, which I think in principle applies across the board in civil proceedings. [read post]
4 Aug 2009, 5:48 pm
"Re-reading Iqbal (a new take on the 12(b)(6) wars)": At the "Concurring Opinions" blog, law professor Jaya Ramji-Nogales has published this post written by law professor Adam N. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 3:27 pm
We’re pleased to announce a new scholarship fund, the Helen B. and Lewis E. [read post]
18 Sep 2013, 5:30 am
Not every claimed invention will be able to be re-patented, but there will undoubtedly be some that will be able to be re-patented. [read post]
3 Jun 2018, 10:00 pm
§ 41.41(b) to find waiver. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 10:12 am
On 27 August 2011, IPBiz had posted on the inter partes re-examination sought by Gevo as to the '188 patent of Butamax[See Gevo's inter partes re-exam request as to US 7,851,188 ]. [read post]
2 Jul 2008, 5:04 pm
43(B)log: "Is it false to make your competitor's service worse and then say you're better? [read post]
4 Feb 2016, 6:04 am
Securities Litigation, a putative securities fraud class action lawsuit, brought under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. [read post]
24 May 2008, 10:01 pm
Eli Research's Part B Insider ran a story last week (p. 3) with five tips on surviving physician practice billing audits, featuring some advice from the HealthBlawger: Stay current on the regs and policies Document care properly Find out why you're being audited Maintain documentation Keep a record of what the auditors review -- David Harlow [read post]
