Search for: "In re I.A." Results 1 - 20 of 38
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Mar 2009, 10:34 am
For publication opinions today (1): In Re: The Termination of the Parent-Child Rel. of I.A., Lavonne Aikens v. [read post]
24 Jul 2014, 12:34 pm
The ruling in In re I.A., Slip Opinion No. 2014-Ohio-3155, 2012-2122, settled questions about the timing of this hearing pursuant to O.R.C. 2152.83(B)(1). [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 10:43 am
A recent decision from the Fourth District Court of Appeals in San Diego, In re I.A., et al, affirmed a trial court decision to remove two children from their home after the children allegedly witnessed one or more incidents of domestic violence between their parents involving weapons. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 1:06 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
The CAFC denied the petition for re-hearing in Arthrex:IT IS ORDERED THAT:1) The petitions for panel rehearing are denied.2) The petitions for rehearing en banc are denied.from the dissent of Judge Dyk:DYK, Circuit Judge, with whom NEWMAN and WALLACH,Circuit Judges join, and with whom HUGHES, CircuitJudge, joins as to Part I.A, dissenting from the denial ofrehearing en banc.I respectfully dissent from the court’s decision not torehear this case en banc.The panel here holds… [read post]
8 Dec 2015, 1:43 pm
So, today I am calling for a moratorium on the term Artificial Intelligence in the practice of law (unless you are actually talking about a Turing machine that bills by the hour), because whether we're discussing Watson, Ross, Kira, or Kim, we're talking about Augmented Human Intelligence. [read post]
30 Oct 2013, 5:42 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
See In re Steele, 305 F.3d 859, 862-63 (CCPA 1962).Bottom line: AFFIRMED [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 12:27 pm by Trent
In section I.A., the guidance is to: “Identify and Understand Any Utility . . . [read post]
22 Sep 2020, 3:05 am by Liz Dunshee
All sessions are shown in Eastern Time – so you will need to adjust accordingly if you’re in a different time zone. [read post]
4 Oct 2022, 7:52 am by Tobias Lutzi
His analysis is based on a wide range of judgments – Shevill, Kronhofer, Kolassa, Löber, eDate, Bolagsupplysningen, Wikingerhof, Gtflix Tv, … – but does not fail to acknowledge the occasional nuance, as reflected, i.a., by the recent decisions in Vereniging van Effectenbezitters and Mittelbayerischer Verlag. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 3:06 am by Broc Romanek
For these 8-K items, there is no Rule 10b-5 liability for failure to file (under Rule 13a-11(c)), and the company does not lose Form S-3 eligibility if the disclosure is made by the due date of the next quarterly filing (under General Instruction I.A.3). [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 11:10 am by Andrew Frisch
As described in Part I.A. above, Novartis sells its drugs to wholesalers; the wholesalers then sell them to pharmacies; and the pharmacies ultimately sell the drugs to patients who have prescriptions for them. [read post]
19 Jul 2016, 11:18 am by David Markus
 In another order, In Re William Hunt, we see some more concurrences with all three judges (Wilson, Rosenbaum, and Jill Pryor). [read post]
3 Feb 2015, 5:47 pm
Moreover, we're talking about groups of claims in the same application. [read post]
12 Jun 2022, 9:41 am by Eric Goldman
Initial Interest Confusion It’s 2022 and we’re still dealing with this shit. [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 6:59 am by Vanessa Schoenthaler
Something to Consider Even if You’re Not a WKSI While CorpFin’s revised statement on WKSI waivers no doubt provides WKSIs with a greater degree of insight into the waiver assessment process, even non-WKSIs can glean insight from the framework in terms of understanding CorpFin’s current thinking on what constitutes a showing of good cause for purposes of a waiver request and perhaps even outside of the context of a waiver request for those issuers that a find themselves in… [read post]
5 Mar 2016, 6:38 am
The Council on Ethics for the Government Pension Fund Global (Etikkrådet for Statens pensjonsfond utland) recommends the exclusion of San Leon Energy Plc (SLE; SLGYY) from the Government Pension Fund Global because the company contributes to serious violations of fundamental ethical norms through its onshore hydrocarbon exploration in Western Sahara on behalf of Moroccan authorities. [read post]