Search for: "DOES 1-121" Results 181 - 200 of 1,220
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jan 2014, 7:18 am by editor
Therefore, if the amount you owe the IRS does not exceed $5,000.00, then your principal residence is exempt from levy. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 7:18 am by editor
Therefore, if the amount you owe the IRS does not exceed $5,000.00, then your principal residence is exempt from levy. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 12:00 am by Sander van Rijnswou
Hence the nine-month opposition period under Article 99(1) EPC ended on Thursday 22 May 2008. [read post]
21 Sep 2017, 2:32 pm by Dennis Crouch
Baker, 121 F.2d 752, 756 (9th Cir. 1941) (“A ‘regular place of business’ is, obviously, a place where such business is carried on ‘regularly’ and not merely temporarily, or for some special work or particular transaction. [read post]
15 Jul 2019, 3:11 am
" In re Kohr Bros., Inc., 121 U.S.P.Q.2d 1793, 1795 (T.T.A.B. 2017) (quoting In re Osterberg, 83 U.S.P.Q.2d 1220, 1223 (T.T.A.B. 2007). [read post]
3 Oct 2016, 6:03 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  The D&O insurance policy defined the term claim to mean, in relevant part, as “1. [read post]
13 Mar 2008, 3:37 pm
S.121(1) did not mean that the right to buy was extinguished by a possession order under Ground 16. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 11:44 pm by Roel van Woudenberg
If G 1/18 is applicable, but the case is not stayed as the outcome on the merits of the appeal does not change, can a decision on the reimbursement/refund be made without staying in view of the relevance of G 1/18 on that decision (esp. as refund is not at the discretion of the EPO/Board)? [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 11:02 am by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.
Just because these interviews are legally allowed, however, does not necessarily mean they are a good idea. [read post]
1 Feb 2024, 12:45 pm by admin
Socrates viewed philosophy as beginning in wonder,[1] but Socrates and his philosophic heirs recognized that philosophy does not get down to business until it starts to clarify the terms of discussion. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
The opponent does not have to have any special interest in challenging the patent: G 1/84 and T 798/93. [read post]
11 Oct 2007, 4:36 am
"Examined" in 37 CFR 1.78(d)(1)(ii)(B) Does Not Preclude Multiple PCT National Phase Divisionals:The term "examined" in 37 CFR 1.78(d)(1)(ii)(B) is limited to examination within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 131 and 37 CFR 1.104 in a national application under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) or a national stage application resulting from an international application entering the national stage in the United States under 35 U.S.C. 371.The term "examined" in 37 CFR… [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 9:41 am by Biersdorf & Associates
Status Update: There is currently no funding for property acquisition or construction, but this segment does have environmental approval. [read post]
11 Oct 2007, 7:32 am
For example:The provisions of 37 CFR 1.78(d)(1) in effect on November 1, 2007 are hereby waived to the extent that a continuing application that satisfies the conditions set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(d)(1)(ii), (d)(1)(iii), or (d)(1)(vi) will not be taken into account for purposes of determining whether there is an "other application filed on or after August 21, 2007 that also claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) of such… [read post]