Sentences with phrase «jaw rules on»

Lufthansa has very generous stopover and open - jaw rules on award tickets.

Not exact matches

Very early on it emerges that all rules are off for this one and the genuinely jaw dropping ending will have fans cursing every single day until the sequel is released.

Do: Asia Miles has generous stopover rules that allows you up to FIVE stopovers and 2 open jaws on a round - trip ticket.

United has the most flexible routing rules, allowing for a stopover and two open - jaws on round - trip award tickets.

To capitalize on what United offers for award tickets, you will need to know a few strategies for booking flights, including their stopover and open jaw rules.

Using the rules above, a sample itinerary could be: [JFK — TXL (transfer)-- VIE (stopover)-- DUS (stopover)-- MIA (open jaw)-RSB- all on Airberlin.

United had relatively friendly award routing rules that allowed one stopover and two open jaws on roundtrip award tickets.Those rules are gone now though and have been replaced by the «Excursionist Perk,» which is essentially a free segment on an international itinerary.

They never charge fuel surcharges, they allow free date changes, they have very flexible routing rules, they allow one - way awards for half the mileage, they have a short - haul award for 20,000 miles, they allow for a stopover and an open - jaw so that you can really maximize an award trip into multiple free trips, they have an around - the - world award to visit tons of cities on one award ticket, and they have dozens of partners to fly on, most of which can be booked on their website.

One critical rule for the companion fare is that it can only be used on a simple round - trip itinerary, while we have an open jaw.

(1) extending negligent misrepresentation beyond «business transactions» to product liability, unprecedented in Texas; (2) ignoring multiple US Supreme Court decisions that express and implied preemption operate independently (as discussed here) to dismiss implied preemption with nothing more than a cite to the Medtronic v. Lohr express preemption decision; (3) inventing some sort of state - law tort to second - guess the defendant following one FDA marketing approach (§ 510k clearance) over another (pre-market approval), unprecedented anywhere; (4) holding that the learned intermediary rule does not apply whenever a defendant «compensates» or «incentivizes» physicians to use its products, absent any Texas state or appellate authority; (5) imposing strict liability on an entity not in the product's chain of sale, contrary to Texas statute (§ 82.001 (2)-RRB-; (6) creating a claim for «tortious interference» with the physician - patient relationship, again utterly unprecedented; (7) creating «vicarious» breach of fiduciary duty for engaging doctors to serve as expert witnesses in mass tort litigation also involving their patients, ditto; and (8) construing a consulting agreement with a physician as «commercial bribery» to avoid the Texas cap on punitive damages, jaw - droppingly unprecedented.