Search for: "In the Matter of Amendments to Rules 1 and 10"
Results 2461 - 2480
of 5,508
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Oct 2011, 11:01 am
Only two of the three priorities were completely cited.On February 12, 2002, the WIPO informed the applicant that the third priority claim was deemed not to have been made because the applicant had not responded to the invitation under Rule 26bis.2(a) PCT.The A3 publication dated May 10, 2002, mentioned only the first two priorities.The WIPO transmitted two priority documents to the EPO.On November 22, 2002, the applicant entered the European phase.In a letter to the EPO dated… [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 2:39 pm
That period of 21 days is also the time limit within which the recipient of an improvement notice may appeal to the RPT against the notice under Part 3 of Schedule 1 to the Act (Schedule 1, paragraphs 10(1) and 14(1)). [read post]
30 Sep 2018, 3:01 pm
TRUMP: Somebody could come and say 30 years ago, 25 years ago, 10 years ago, 5 years ago, he did a horrible thing to me. [read post]
30 Sep 2018, 3:01 pm
TRUMP: Somebody could come and say 30 years ago, 25 years ago, 10 years ago, 5 years ago, he did a horrible thing to me. [read post]
18 Oct 2024, 10:12 am
Timely notice of the adjudication hearing had been mailed to Grandparents’ counsel in the DNA matter and a hearing was later conducted on their motion to modify custody in the custody matter. [read post]
4 Oct 2009, 10:06 am
The Village had indicated it would not intervene as this is a private matter between property owners. [read post]
4 Oct 2009, 10:06 am
The Village had indicated it would not intervene as this is a private matter between property owners. [read post]
12 Dec 2019, 8:58 am
The defendants appealed. (1) The defendants argued the use of the word “robbery” by government witnesses during trial was prejudicial and violated the rules of evidence for lay and expert opinion. [read post]
23 Jul 2013, 5:01 pm
According to this decision, point [1] of the Reasons:“… the amended version of R 36 which entered into force on 1 April 2010 is still based on the principle that a divisional application may be filed ‘relating to any pending earlier European patent application’. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 11:14 am
Therefore, the Court held that the resulting two year sentence enhancement in the instant matter was proper, and denied Mr. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 9:01 pm
(For more on this indefensible ruling, see here.) [read post]
5 Jun 2024, 3:38 am
1. [read post]
7 Aug 2014, 12:38 pm
As several courts have now discovered, the Supreme Court’s modification of Rule 8 without following the Rules Enabling Act’s provisions that allow the rules to be amended, see 17 U.S.C. [read post]
9 Nov 2007, 10:23 am
Issues. 1. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 3:10 pm
Stamer available including: Group Health Plans & Insurer To Get More Time To Meet Affordable Care Act Summary of Benefits and Coverage Requirements CMS Final Medicare Rule Imposes Many Conditions On Access To Medicare Claims Data To Evaluate Providers & Suppliers OSHA Updates Safety Resources To Prevent Construction, Other “Top 10? [read post]
29 Jan 2011, 6:36 am
The Second District Court of Appeals in Los Angeles has ruled that banks are “legally bound by their loan modification promises,” and can be sued for fraud when homeowners rely on such promises and are damaged as a result. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 8:51 am
Tom Vilsack (USDA) - 4/1/15. [read post]
16 Nov 2009, 9:04 am
§ 56(a)(1). [read post]
8 Oct 2007, 2:01 am
Mark Lemley, Stanford Law SchoolTrademark Use Requirement in Dilution Primarily a descriptive argument: (1) We've had a form of TM use requirement in the dilution statute for the past 10 years; (2) it worked pretty well; (3) the requirement is strengthened in the TDRA. [read post]
18 Oct 2013, 5:00 am
Id. at *1 (emphasis added). [read post]
