Search for: "J. K." Results 161 - 180 of 6,958
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Feb 2012, 1:24 pm by JP Sarmiento
  We also sent a request to the Korean Embassy to issue a No Objection Statement and recommend this waiver based on the fact that our client is eligible to get a K-1 Fiancé Visa, and will be eligible to adjust in the United States after her K-1 admission and the subsequent marriage to her U.S. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 5:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
In decision J 16/96 the Board did not have to consider the question of whether LPs could be members of an association pursuant to R 101(9) because all the members of the association under consideration were professional representatives.[2.7] Decision J 16/96 [2] expressed the opinion that the DecInt was not binding on the Boards but that it was to be taken into account when interpreting R 101(9) EPC 1973. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 2:54 am by Rechtsanwalt
Die Staatsanwaltschaft Köln hat Anklage gegen einen 52-jährigen Mann wegen versuchtem Totschlag, Bedrohung und unerlaubtem Waffenbesitz erhoben. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
” The other decisions cited by the [applicant] do not deal with the procedural situation after grant of the European patent and its publication and are, therefore, not appropriate to answer the question as to the pendency of an application in the present case. [6] The cited decisions J 7/04 and G 1/09 are based on the wording of former A 97(4) EPC 1973 (now A 97(3)). [read post]
14 Feb 2007, 10:26 am
Continuing on the same elevated plane, he clerked for the late J. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
., J 22/86 [2]; T 162/97 [1.1.2]).Exceptionally, it has been acknowledged that “the requirement for admissibility [laid down in A 108, third sentence, EPC 1973] may be regarded as satisfied if it is immediately apparent upon reading the decision under appeal and the written statement [of grounds] that the decision should be set aside” (see J 22/86 [headnote I]).The reasons given in the decision impugned[2.2] In order to determine whether it is possible for the board to… [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 4:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
This is in line with decisions T 842/90 and J 20/00 where it was considered possible that the payment of an additional fee amounting to [read post]
1 Jan 2013, 5:16 am by Rechtsanwalt
Der angeklagte 30-jährige Russe wurde wegen gefährlicher Körperverletzung zweier Sicherheitskräfte der Diskothek angeklagt. [read post]
6 Jan 2013, 12:22 am by Rechtsanwalt
Dabei soll ...Körperverletzung: 3 Jahre Haft für Angriff mit… Einem 39-jährigen Mann wurde vor dem Landgericht Dortmund eine schwere Körperverletzung zur Last gelegt. [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 6:01 pm by oliver randl
An interpretation of R 56 that some, or all, of the application documents that were originally filed in order to obtain a filing date could be amended, replaced or deleted would indeed be incorrect (see decision J 27/10 [8-18]). [read post]
24 Mar 2008, 9:22 pm
New legal implications arise from building environmentally friendly By K&L Gates attorneys Patrick J. [read post]
19 Aug 2012, 5:01 pm by oliver
About one year ago, we have seen decision J 25/10 (here) where the Legal Board found that a refusal to partially reimburse the examination fee could not be based on the mere assertion that the substantive examination had begun when the application was withdrawn. [read post]