Search for: "Matter of T S B"
Results 201 - 220
of 19,490
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Mar 2010, 8:20 am
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedures § 528.07(b) (“[T]he Board may deem the pleadings to have been amended, by agreement of the parties, to allege the matter. [read post]
7 Jan 2009, 5:50 am
P. 4(b)(1)(B)(i), herebyappeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit from the Order GrantingDefendant's Motion to Dismiss Count One of the Third Superseding Indictment (Docket Entry192) entered in the above entitled matter on December 22, 2008.DATED this 7th day of January, 2009.Respectfully submitted,MATTHEW W. [read post]
15 Oct 2012, 6:00 am
Again, that's a matter of anticipating the likelihood that the film's copyright owner would spot your use and care. [read post]
4 Jun 2018, 3:17 am
(b) The appeal was admissible, essentially for the reasons set out in the provisional opinion of the Board. [read post]
27 Mar 2011, 3:01 pm
In principle, the parties should be informed on the new objections in writing, as soon as possible (T 433/93; T 1164/00; T 64/03).[1.3] In the present case the Board notes that the late submission and the admission of the new ground for opposition into the proceedings have not been mentioned in writing or orally. [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 6:21 pm
” He continued: “I don’t think it’s a matter of anybody backing down, I think it’s a matter of us trying to find common ground on what is an incredible budget… I’m confident that we’re going to find a solution that will be good because no one will be happy. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 2:58 pm
Landau said that if there is any one theme that runs through the Court's 16(b) jurisprudence, it is that precisely because Section 16(b) is prophylactic it should be interpreted in a literal and mechanical way., which argues for repose, because you don't get into a lot of these questions about who knew what when. [read post]
12 Dec 2023, 12:55 pm
Morgan is instructive as an early illustration of Rule 608(b)’s application. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 9:04 am
She strongly criticizes the majority for disregarding the Supreme Court’s decision. [read post]
15 Jul 2012, 7:49 pm
Nice try by B of A's PR flacks, though. [read post]
6 Mar 2009, 9:00 am
Interestingly, the AD2 reversed the outcome because the mere existence of a herniated disc -- unaccompanied by any evidence of limitations -- wasn't enough to comprise a "serious injury" as a matter of law. [read post]
11 Nov 2013, 5:01 pm
Therefore, G 5/83 ([…] and A 54(5) EPC 2000, which according to the EBA in G 2/08 [5.9 ff.] is considered to fill the lacuna in the EPC 1973 which had been filled in a praetorian way by the EBA with G 5/83 and the case law based on that decision) has consistently been interpreted by the boards as not providing for the patentability of uses in any of the methods recited in A 52(4) EPC 1973 (or A 53(c) EPC 2000) involving means that are a “device” (see for example T 1314/05… [read post]
11 Feb 2020, 1:52 am
T 727/00, Reasons, point 1.1.4).1.6.3 The board notes, however, that most decisions following this well-established approach relate to amendments based on lists of non-con [read post]
4 Nov 2022, 1:36 am
The appellant's final requests were that the decision under appeal be set aside and that a patent be granted on the basis of the claims of a sole claim request. [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 4:00 am
Simply this: Your firm’s brand matters. [read post]
16 Nov 2013, 6:09 am
If (a) you are running a business that has a commitment as part of ingrained policy to obey the law; (b) President Obama announces that his administration will for the time being not be enforcing the law with regard, e.g., to existing insurance policies, or for that matter, the employer mandate; (c) is there a sound argument that you should not obey the law because it’s not being enforced and because the governing authorities actually don’t want you to… [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 4:53 am
In the Matter of the Arbitration Between Jeffrey T. [read post]
24 Aug 2017, 1:00 am
As neither the appellant nor respondent 1 had presented said matter in their submissions according to Article 12(1) and (2) RPBA, it was not within the scope of the present appeal. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 4:00 am
The agreement further provided that the corporate tenant – East Coast Fish Market Inc d/b/a Lamia’s Fish Market – would pay some rent, together with use and occupancy on a go-forward basis. [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 9:59 am
After more rounds, Meggitt added a Lanham Act false advertising claim.First, the court ruled that the claim had to satisfy Rule 9(b) because, though one could allege negligent false advertising (comment: or for that matter faultless false advertising; that’s what strict liability means), if the plaintiff alleges a unified course of fraudulent conduct then Rule 9(b) applies. [read post]
