Search for: "I.C." Results 201 - 220 of 275
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 May 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
It is irrelevant whether there was any reason to search for such information or for requesting it, as well as whether a member of the public indeed did take notice of it (Case Law of the Boards of appeal, point I.C.1.8).In T 947/99 the alleged prior public use concerned the visit of an ice-cream factory. [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 5:47 pm
. * * * In summary, we conclude that the threshold requirement regarding benefits received, as set out in I.C. [read post]
25 Jun 2011, 11:01 am by Oliver G. Randl
In the board’s view, this feature introduces a limitation concerning the purpose of the claimed apparatus which distinguishes it from the devices known in the art at the relevant date.[5] According to the jurisprudence of the Boards of Appeal (see T 523/89 as well as further decisions cited in “Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO”, chapter I.C.5.3.3), a statement of purpose made in a claim in respect of a product is to be interpreted as meaning that the claimed… [read post]
26 Jan 2009, 11:55 pm
The Verified Petition for Emergency Change of Custody, filed August 7, includes the following paragraph: (9) I.C. 31-17-3-4 notice and opportunity to be heard was given to the Mother's existing counsel of record . . . by FAX this date at 11:00 A.M., a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto . . . . [read post]
3 Jul 2007, 10:13 am
Lacking that prerequisite for sentence modification pursuant to I.C. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
However, the Board remarks that according to the established jurisprudence of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO the common general knowledge of a skilled person is normally represented by encyclopaedias, textbooks, dictionaries and handbooks on the subject in question or even patent specifications and scientific publications in the case that the field of research is so new that technical knowledge was not available from textbooks (see case law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO, 5th edition 2006,… [read post]
30 Jul 2007, 11:24 am
With this evidence linking Grant to the prior felonies, a reasonable fact finder could well have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that he was the same person convicted of the two prior unrelated felonies as required by I.C. 35-50-2-8(a).2 Moreover, we do not share counsel's enthusiasm for bright line rules. [read post]
5 Sep 2010, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
Thus, the Board finds that the present case is rather to be decided according to the established case law already recalled in the decision under appeal, i.e. by taking into account that a prior art document does not render available matter whose identification requires twofold selection among two lists of alternatives in that document (see Case Law of the Board of Appeal, 5th Edition, 2006, I.C.4.2.3). [1.5] Therefore, the Board concurs with the finding of the OD that the subject-matter of… [read post]
12 Jul 2009, 3:32 am
That [Grandmother] meets the requirements of I.C. 31-9-2-35.5 and is named as Defacto Custodian of [J.V.].2. [read post]