Oral Argument Clause Samples
The Oral Argument clause establishes the procedures and conditions under which parties may present their arguments verbally before a court or tribunal. Typically, this clause outlines when oral arguments are permitted, how much time each side is allotted, and any requirements for notifying the court or opposing parties. By setting clear guidelines for oral presentations, the clause ensures that both parties have a fair opportunity to advocate their positions and that the proceedings remain orderly and efficient.
Oral Argument. Each of the Parties may, along with its counsel, make an oral argument before the Patent Arbitrator to supplement or augment the analysis contained in the Position and Rebuttal Binders. The length of, and procedures for, such oral arguments shall be determined by the Patent Arbitrator. The Patent Arbitrator may ask questions of the Party and its counsel to assist the Patent Arbitrator in making his determination of inventorship. During such oral argument, the Parties may only use evidence that is of record in the Litigation or set forth in or by reference in the Position or Rebuttal Binders, or was otherwise developed in the Patent Arbitrator’s witness interviews.
Oral Argument. The arbitrator may, in the arbitrator’s sole discretion, convene oral argument. If oral argument is held, it shall occur within [***] of the submission of responsive briefs.
Oral Argument. 1010.15 Service O f Documents
Oral Argument. Each party will be given an opportunity to present facts and figures in support of your issue.
Oral Argument. There shall be no right to oral argument other than that provided in rule 12(h), § 202.112(h). [43 FR 30510, July 14, 1978, as amended at 60 FR 8467, Feb. 14, 1995]
(a) As soon as practicable after the receipt of the record and report from the hearing clerk, the judicial officer, on the basis of and after due consider- ation of the record, shall issue an order in the proceeding, which shall be served on the parties.
(b) If the judicial officer deems it ad- visable to do so, the order may be made a tentative order. In such event, a pre- siding officer shall be assigned and the tentative order shall be served on each party, and each party shall have 20 days in which to file written exceptions to it, and arguments or briefs in sup- port of such exceptions. If no party timely files exceptions, the tentative order shall automatically become the final order in the proceeding, and no- ▇▇▇▇ of such fact shall be served on the parties. If any party timely files such exceptions, they shall be handled in the same manner as a petition filed under rule 17, § 202.117.
Oral Argument. The presiding offi- cer shall permit oral argument by the parties or their counsel who are present at an oral hearing, but may limit such argument to any extent that the presiding officer finds necessary for the expeditious or proper disposition of the case.
Oral Argument. On January 17, 2001, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of PGA Tour v Martin164. The Tour once again argued its position that its tours are not public accommodations, and therefore not covered by the ADA, and that even if covered by the ADA, the use of a cart is a fundamental alteration to the sport. ▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ attorneys once again claimed that the Tour was subject to the ADA and that walking is not fundamental to professional golf. During oral arguments, the Tour’s attorney, ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇, argued that the Ninth Circuit “never took account of just what a top-level professional sport really is … They are simply tests of excellence, of who can perform the best on a set of physical tasks, and those tasks are defined by the rules of the sport.”165 Justice ▇▇▇▇▇▇ seemed to sympathize with the Tour’s position, asking “if the people who make the rules for the PGA Tour say ‘we want to make this particular game tougher than regular golf games,’ why shouldn’t we respect it?”166 ▇▇▇▇ also asserted that Title III applies only to customers of public accommodations such as restaurants and hotels, a category that does not include ▇▇▇▇▇▇. ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. Green, PGA Renews Bid to ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, THE OREGONIAN (Portland, Or.), May 5, 1999, at C1. 160 Id. 161 ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 204 F.3d at 1002. 162 Id. at 1000. 163 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇, Disabled Golfer can Continue to Ride Cart, THE OREGONIAN (Portland, Or.), Mar. 7, 2000, at A1. 164 ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 532 U.S. at 661. 165 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, Supreme Court Hears the ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇, N.Y. TIMES, Jan. 18, 2001, at D4. ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇, High Court Weighs Rights of People with Disabilities vs. the Rules of Golf, THE OREGONIAN (Portland, Or.), Jan. 18, 2001, at A1. This view was forcefully challenged by Justices ▇’▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, both of whom had been important swing votes in past ADA decisions. During ▇▇▇▇’▇ presentations, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ interrupted and wondered if ▇▇▇▇ was “taking too narrow a view” of the ADA’s scope167. After the oral arguments concluded, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ was joined on the steps of the Supreme Court by Senators ▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇. Speaking to reporters, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ acknowledged the long tradition of walking in profession golf, but concluded that “sometimes tradition needs to give way to the reality of equal opportunity.” When asked his impression of the arguments, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ replied that the only thing running through his mind was that “these nine people just chose the leader of the free world [in ▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇], and now they’re going to decide...
Oral Argument. An opportunity for parties to present oral argument may be provided at the discretion of the Administrator, except as limited by § 1010.10(c).
Oral Argument. Request for oral argument. A party may request oral argument on an issue raised in a paper at a time set by the Board. The request must be filed as a separate paper and must specify the issues to be argued.