Search for: "D2" Results 61 - 80 of 408
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Nov 2021, 5:00 pm by Laurent Teyssèdre
La division d'examen avait rejeté la demande pour défaut d'activité inventive au vu du "document" D2, en l'espèce une vidéo Youtube montrant l'utilisation d'un logiciel Spotlight. [read post]
21 Nov 2023, 4:00 pm by Laurent Teyssèdre
 La Chambre est d'avis que le problème technique objectif était de proposer un système alternatif, et que l'ajout des caractéristiques 1m et 1n n'impliquait pas d'activité inventive car D2 enseignait ces caractéristiques et leurs avantages en termes de résolution.S'agissant de la [read post]
7 Sep 2014, 8:35 pm by Patent Docs
Patent Nos. 6,699,498 ("Transdermal Therapeutic Systems Having Improved Stabilty and Their Production," issued March 2, 2004), 6,884,434 ("Transdermal Therapeutic System Which Contains a D2 Agonist and Which is Provided for... [read post]
24 Dec 2021, 5:37 am
Case NameIssue 1Benthin A2(a) deceptiveness2Budge Bexcusable neglect3Converse C2(a) false connection4DuPont D2(e)(2)5Great Seats E2(e)(3)6Morton-Norwich F2(d)7Newbridge Cutlery G2(f)8Notre Dame Huntimely disclosure9Pioneer I2(e)(4)10Spirits Int'l J2(e)(5)Read comments and post your comment here. [read post]
1 May 2016, 9:00 pm by Laurent Teyssèdre
La division d'examen avait cité le document D2, capture réalisée par le site "archive.org". [read post]
25 Jun 2023, 4:00 pm by Laurent Teyssèdre
La demande concernait une méthode d'évaluation automatique de textes rédigés lors d'un examen, basée sur une méthode d'apprentissage automatique particulière.Pour examiner l'activité inventive, plutôt que de chercher quelles sont réellement les différences par rapport à l'état de la technique le plus proche D2, la Chambre se demande déjà si l'on peut… [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 4:00 pm by Laurent Teyssèdre
La tondeuse à gazon électrique revendiquée se distinguait de celle de D2 par 6 différences portant sur le type de moteur (courant continu à commutation électrique), le fait que le compartiment de la batterie était doté d'un couvercle pouvant être ouvert, le fait que la batterie était une batterie Li-ion, ainsi que par la présence d'un système de commande comprenant un système de… [read post]
9 May 2024, 4:00 pm by Laurent Teyssèdre
Le brevet en cause avait pour objet un procédé de dorure d'un substrat, comprenant une étape préalable d'impression par jet d'encre de reliefs destinés à être dorés.La division d'opposition avait considéré que D2 et D3 ne pouvaient constituer des points de départ valables car ils ne concernent pas des procédés d'impression par dorure sélective et ne visent donc pas… [read post]
30 Sep 2019, 3:26 am by Diane Tweedlie
The relevance of the contents of D1 and D2 was also not questioned.VII. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 12:33 am by Roel van Woudenberg
 The applicant's request for postponement of the oral proceedings in view of this introduction of D2 and D3 was denied. [read post]
4 Mar 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
In substance, D2 discloses the examples A, B and C. [read post]
22 Nov 2019, 1:01 am by Sander van Rijnswou
D2 concerns the printing of unforgeable and unmodifiable certificates for money orders at an ATM or POS terminal, as well as their redemption. [read post]
7 Jan 2020, 2:10 am by Roel van Woudenberg
A key element in the debate was whether the presence of a document D1 which would be closer to the claimed invention than a document D2 would require any inventive step objection to start from D1 as the closest prior art, or whether an attack starting from D2 as the closest prior art would also be admissible and allowable - as well as whether doing so would not only not be correct, but would -if applied by the Examining Division- account to  a substantial procedural violation.… [read post]
20 May 2021, 2:57 am by Jessica Kroeze
 Is it "implicit" that both D1 and D2  had been considered as closest prior art, and is this "implicit discussion" sufficient to satisfy the appellant's right to be heard? [read post]
24 Jul 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
Document D2 discloses experimental results relating to the activity of picoxystrobin in comparison with other known strobilurin derivates such as azoxystrobin and kresoxim-methyl, which are mentioned in document D1. [read post]
18 Jul 2019, 1:00 am
D2, in fact, indicated that the glass layer explodes on exposure to excess heat (as opposed to softening and flowing). [read post]
13 Oct 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
Consequently, tantalum hydride is not an obvious alternative to tantalum metal as a starting material for the process of D1.In addition, even if D1 and D2 were to be combined, there is no indication in D2 that use of a hydride starting powder results in an oxygen content below 100 ppm.[3.7] The subject-matter of claim 1 is not obvious in light of D1 and D2. [read post]
8 Jul 2009, 9:49 am
D2 a donc été rendu accessible au public la veille du dépôt du brevet en cause. [read post]
27 Sep 2009, 5:40 pm
The single communication from the ED pursuant to A 96(2) EPC 1973 merely signalled agreement with the IPER, indicating lack of novelty with respect to D1, and further cited D2 and D3, merely referring to passages thereof cited in the European Search Report (ESR) without further explanation or amplification. [read post]