Search for: "Downloader 97"
Results 261 - 280
of 497
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 May 2012, 5:01 pm
The ED expressed its opinion that the objection of lack of inventive step was still based on the skilled person’s CGK as acknowledged in the application, whereas document D5 was merely used to refute the applicant’s argument that the background art of the description merely reflected in-house knowledge.At the end of the OPs the chairman announced the decision of the ED to refuse the request for continuing the proceedings in writing and to refuse the European patent application under A… [read post]
22 May 2012, 5:01 pm
The purpose of this provision is, apart from administrative purposes, to secure the appellant’s identification and to allow establishment of whether or not the appeal was filed by a party to the proceedings within the meaning of A 107 EPC 1973 (see T 97/98 [1.3]).Deficiencies and omissions regarding the appellant’s name or address may be remedied under R 65(2), first sentence, EPC 1973 on invitation of the board of appeal, even after expiry of the two-month time limit under A… [read post]
21 May 2012, 5:01 pm
This decision – the knowledge of which I owe to a kind reader of this blog – deals with an appeal against a refusal of a request by the Receiving Section (RS).The application under consideration was filed on August 13, 2009 and claimed the priority of a U.S. application that had been filed on August 14, 2008 (hereinafter “priority application”). [read post]
19 May 2012, 11:01 am
It remains to be discussed whether the earlier application provides a basis for the attributive term “boundary” used in this context and not literally disclosed: The earlier application as filed describes the connecting portion […] as a “rigidity-suddenly-changing portion formed in the middle portion”, e.g. a portion between the base portion 42A having a high rigidity and the bag housing portion 42B having a lower rigidity as described with regard to the first… [read post]
16 May 2012, 5:01 pm
The starting resin having values of 13,1%, 54,8% and 9600 ppm, respectively, the reduction can be calculated: Example 21: 10% AZE, 100% ACH and 97% AOX Example 22: 2% AZE, 89% ACH and 92% AOX. [read post]
10 May 2012, 5:01 pm
Should you wish to download the whole decision, just click here.To have a look at the file wrapper, click here. [read post]
1 May 2012, 5:01 pm
This appeal was filed against the refusal of the application under consideration by the Examining Division (ED). [read post]
28 Apr 2012, 9:15 am
Q#8: After I download my Will, can I go back and edit? [read post]
21 Apr 2012, 12:42 pm
The trial court sentenced him to 97 months in prison. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 8:10 am
Aleynikov was sentenced to 97 months of imprisonment, a three-year term of supervised release, and a $12,500 fine. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 5:01 pm
[…]To download the whole decision or have a look at the file wrapper, click here. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 5:01 pm
The present appeal was filed against the rejection of an opposition by the Opposition Division (OD).Claim 1 of the main request (and of the patent as granted) read:A method, using a computer, of determining an efficient schedule for a plurality of scheduled agents in a telephone call center, each of the plurality of scheduled agents having a combination of defined skills and wherein the plurality of scheduled agents may be organized into skill groups each including all scheduled agents having a… [read post]
25 Mar 2012, 5:01 pm
Well, here is a recent decision dealing with a multiplication of independent claims in the course of opposition proceedings.One landmark decision on this topic was T 223/97 [2.2], where Board 3.2.1 stated (my translation of the French original):“According to a principle set forth in decision G 1/84 [9] opposition proceedings are not to be considered an extension of the examination proceedings and is not to be misused as such. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 6:01 pm
The present board agrees with the approach of the board in T 1212/97. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 6:01 pm
Should you wish to download the whole decision, just click here.The file wrapper can be found here. [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 11:00 pm
You can download the entire statement here, The questions in bold are those asked by the Inquiry in their request – read part 1 here. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 5:01 pm
T 870/92, T 19/97, T 478/99, T 413/02, T 6/05). [read post]
25 Feb 2012, 11:01 am
Should you wish to download the whole decision, just click here.The file wrapper can be found here. [read post]
16 Feb 2012, 5:01 pm
T 483/90, T 613/91 and T 1/97[5.2] (a) In T 483/90 the appeal was filed by the opponent without specifying its address; with respect to the name, even if it was not completely clear, it seems that there was no deficiency. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 5:01 pm
The situation referred to by the ED, whereby subject-matter in respect of which a search fee has not been paid can only be pursued in a divisional application, presupposes that the searched and non-searched inventions are in fact found to be non-unitary when the ED upon review agrees with the opinion of the search division (see decision J 3/09 [5.1-7] and references therein to decisions G 2/92 and T 631/97; see also Guidelines for Examination, C-III, 7.10, third and fourth paragraphs, and… [read post]
