Search for: "Does 1 - 84" Results 1 - 20 of 2,401
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Sep 2018, 2:57 am by Jelle Hoekstra
Hence, non-compliance with the two-month time limit under Rule 84(1) EPC does not directly cause a loss of ri [read post]
17 Jan 2007, 11:05 am
Judge Posner's opinion notes that "[t]he minimum guidelines sentence for a bank robbery that does not involve the use of a gun is 46 months, and when the consecutive 84-month sentence required by section 924(c)(1) is tacked on to the minimum guidelines sentence, the total is 130 months. [read post]
21 Oct 2020, 5:13 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
.): 27 Motion to Enforce Automatic Stay 73-1 LDF Motion to Dismiss 74-1 LDF Businsess Corp Motion to Dismiss 82 Response to 73 84 Response to 74 92 Reply in Support of 73 93 Reply in Support of 74 97-1 Surreply 111 LDF Surreply to the Surreply 112 LDF Business Corp Surreply to the Surreply 113 Order [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 1:38 pm by Jeanette Moffa
The question remains that if a Pennsylvania resident makes a purchase while on vacation in Florida and listens to, for example, a one-time podcast while still in Florida, then does Act 84 of 2016 extend to that purchase? [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 5:58 am by Kellie McTammany
While 84 billion dollars is a lot of money it does not account for additional discretionary spending for technology purchases such as gifts for children or grandchildren; therefore the number of dollars spent on technology by seniors could be significantly higher than already projected. [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 1:38 pm by Jeanette Moffa
The question remains that if a Pennsylvania resident makes a purchase while on vacation in Florida and listens to, for example, a one-time podcast while still in Florida, then does Act 84 of 2016 extend to that purchase? [read post]
4 May 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
Thus it appears that claim 1 is not objectionable under A 84. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
In the case underlying decision T 1459/05 claim 1 as granted had been combined with its dependent claim 4 and the amendment considered under A 84 was the feature added to claim 1. [read post]
7 Jan 2013, 7:22 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
The rejections of claims 1, 84-87, 89-94, 96-99, 101, 107, 108, 112,and 115-118 are affirmed.KSR was cited as to claim 1:The selection of an appropriate depth of field for the Campbell endoscope from a range known in the art amounts to no more than the implementation of a known feature with a predictable result, which bars patentability. [read post]
12 Dec 2009, 8:10 am
The Download of the Week is The First Amendment and Commercial Speech, 84 IND. [read post]
1 Nov 2017, 8:14 am by Roel van Woudenberg
The Board does not accept this argument for the following reasons.4.1 Within the context of amended claim 1 at issue feature (c) does not expressly exclude the presence of phosphate builder salts other than sodium tripolyphosphate in the claimed composition. [read post]
10 Dec 2015, 9:19 am by Ray
As of December 1 of this year, Rule 84 is abrogated, and the official appendix of forms is no more. [read post]