The legal representative for
the applicant filed a motion for withdrawal for the said hearing.
Not exact matches
In the
motion filed by federal government lawyer, Mr. Oladipo Opeseyi (SAN), the
applicant also applied for an order to permit the witnesses to be addressed with Pseudo names in the cause of the trial of the Ex-NSA.
According to a
Motion on Notice
filed before a Federal High Court sitting in Akure, the
applicant through his legal team led by Dr Remi Oyebanji, described the remand order issued and dated August 24, 2016 by the first respondent (Justice Akeredolu) and executed by the second respondent through his officers as illegal and unconstitutional.
Its counsel, Michael Carroll of law firm Latham and Watkins,
filed a
motion to suspend the application process, «while
Applicant considers whether or not to withdraw.»
If the
applicant wishes to apply for an extended protection order, the
applicant must wait until three weeks after the date the temporary order is served before a
motion to extend the order can be
filed with the court.
(2) If a
motion is brought under section (1), a) the
applicant must set a date for the hearing that is i. No later than 60 days after notice of the
motion is
filed with the court, and ii.
A
motion for post-conviction DNA testing must be
filed within five years after the enactment of the IPA or within three years of the
applicant's conviction, whichever comes later.
If the judge either denies the application or issues a protection order that expires, the
applicant can
file a
motion to release bond.
In the context of the student unrest over proposed increases in university tuition fees, the
Applicant, Jean - François Morasse,
filed a
motion under Québec's art. 53 C.C.P. asking the Respondent, Gabriel Nadeau - Dubois, be cited for contempt of court.
The Trademark Office in this case stated that in order to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to its intent to use on a
motion for summary judgment, an
applicant must rely on specific facts that establish the «existence of an ability and willingness to use the mark in the United States to identify [the goods in the application] at the time of the
filing of the application.»
Facts: The
applicant Mother
filed an affidavit in support of her
motion for advance (interim) funding in respect of the appeal of the respondent, the father, from the order of Chappel J. dismissing his challenge to the jurisdiction of Ontario courts to adjudicate Mother's claims against him for custody, child support, and spousal support.