Search for: "MATTER OF T B"
Results 241 - 260
of 19,999
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Sep 2013, 5:01 pm
It therefore provides the means to stop applicants, in reply to the first communication, dropping existing claims, replacing them by switching to unsearched and non-unitary subject-matter extracted from the description, i.e., claiming different subject-matter in sequence rather than simultaneously (T 274/03 [4], T 915/03 [3], T 1285/11 [2]). [read post]
30 Oct 2011, 6:01 pm
T 1685/07).Therefore, in the present circumstances of this case, the Board did not see any incentive not to admit this request when exercising its discretion pursuant to Article 13(1) RPBA. [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]
14 Nov 2023, 2:49 pm
Those matters are for the trier of fact alone. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 9:43 pm
Though the emergency had been upheld by a panel of the court, I wasn’t sure if that was correct as a legal matter. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 5:07 am
An antitrust plaintiff that clears the Rule 12(b)(6) hurdle has shown antitrust injury and has satisfied both Twombly and Trinko. [read post]
3 Sep 2009, 4:35 pm
Specifically, it might be useful to consider whether the complaint in this case could have been dismissed under rule 12(b)(6) if the plaintiff hadn’t attached copies of the offending ads and webpages. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 3:24 am
(b) does any act of extraction and/or re-utilisation by that party occur (i) in A only (ii) in B only; or (iii) in both A and B? [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 3:01 pm
”.No further passages of the description deal with the proportion of component (B). [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 10:01 am
If the statute has certain factors in it, and it doesn’t have other factors in it, and the court considers extraneous matters, isn’t that subject to appellate review? [read post]
6 Mar 2016, 2:07 pm
No matter how you plan to do your taxes this year, you likely don’t know what all of the numbers, letters and other information on those forms mean. [read post]
27 Jan 2017, 12:15 am
G 3/08, OJ EPO 2011, 10, reasons 12.2.2, T 1145/10 of 26 February 2016, reasons 5). [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 4:00 am
B LLC v East Coast Fish Mkt. [read post]
15 May 2012, 5:01 pm
The fact that in claim 2 now only one herbicide (B) is required only corresponds to the abandonment of part of the claimed subject-matter and does not generate a new subgroup that has not been originally disclosed (see T 615/95 [6]). [read post]
10 Oct 2014, 7:40 am
Since it wasn’t, res judicata prevents the use of Civ.R.60(B) as a substitute to collaterally attack the judgment. [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 3:49 am
I shortly wished I hadn't. [read post]
18 Jan 2023, 11:41 am
Much of her work has been focused on high profile issues, including the European Commission’s investigation into the proposed London Stock Exchange and Deutsche Börse merger, the impact of the financial transaction, tax and the investigation into FX trading by various competition and financial regulators. [read post]
29 Aug 2013, 4:04 pm
Rather than guess at the Plaintiff’s basis for claiming subject matter jurisdiction is proper, one can file a § 63-15-346(B) motion and demand this information before filing a 12(b)(1) motion. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 9:04 am
The district court ruled that certain system, method, and media claims were not dircted to patentable subject matter under § 101 of the Patent Act. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 5:01 pm
T 867/05 relates to a change from “a membrane material for use in dialysis ... [read post]
