Search for: "S. (K.) VS. S. (B.)" Results 241 - 260 of 363
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Jan 2012, 5:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
The reasons set out in the impugned decision, according to which the opposition was filed belatedly are not objectionable, as will be explained in what follows.Provisions to be applied (EPC 1973 vs. [read post]
24 Dec 2011, 9:25 am
Justice Dalveer BhandariSupreme Court of IndiaThe Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. [read post]
19 Dec 2011, 9:45 am
n üstüne devir etme, hileli iflas vs vs butün hükümler T.C.K da var. [read post]
3 Dec 2011, 9:56 am by Law Lady
MVP HEALTH, INC., Appellee. 1st District.Administrative law -- Agency for Health Care Administration -- Revocation of assisted living facility licenses, denial of licensure renewal applications, and imposition of administrative fines -- Claims against licensee were not proven where only evidence to support claims was uncorroborated hearsay -- Claim that licensee operated another assisted living facility without obtaining a valid license or qualifying for a license exemption was not proven where… [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 5:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
The ED came to the conclusion that the objection raised in its notification had not been completely overcome because it was still impossible to determine the point of intersection ([…] point 1 of the reasons).First, the Board notes that the objection raised in the notification (indefiniteness of the point of intersection of a plane with a linear object of unknown position) and the objection raised in the decision (indefiniteness of the point of intersection of a plane with a thin object) are… [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 8:32 am by Juana Vasella
Das heisst, nach der kantonalen Entscheidung gilt Art. 119 Abs. 6 ZPO, wonach im Verfahren um die unentgeltliche Rechtspflege - ausser bei Bös- oder Mutwilligkeit - keine Gerichtskosten erhoben werden, ebenso für das Rechtsmittelverfahren. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 1:59 am
 The survey did not differentiate between raw milk consumed on the farm vs. purchased by a customer. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 5:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
(the underlined parts correspond to amendments with respect to claim 1 as maintained by the OD)The Board dealt in detail with the question of whether the invention was sufficiently disclosed (A 100(b) and A 83):*** Translation of the French original ***[3] According to claim 1 of all the requests, the claimed process results in “very high mechanical properties” […]. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 12:49 am by Marie Louise
Power Beverages (TTABlog) Test your TTAB judge-ability on this specimen of use for financial advisory services: In re R & B Receivables Management (TTABlog)   US Trade Marks – Lawsuits and strategic steps Estwing – Denying statements for which defendant lacks information or belief is “oxymoronic”: Estwing Manufacturing v CTT Tools (Chicago Intellectual Property Law Blog) Procter & Gamble – NYT again discusses trademark bullying as parties settle… [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 6:42 pm by Law Lady
Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Florida.Bankruptcy -- Sanctions -- Violation of automatic stay and discharge injunction -- Debtor moved for sanctions against state agencies for willfully violating automatic stay and discharge injunction by issuing collection letters and suspending debtor's Florida driver's license for alleged child support arrearages -- Debtor is entitled to award of actual damages and sanctions pursuant to court's statutory and… [read post]
15 Oct 2011, 11:01 am by Oliver G. Randl
The advantage resulting from the reduction of the number of the elements to be handled (EPE with separate PME according to D1 vs. [read post]