Search for: "MATTER OF K B" Results 261 - 280 of 2,704
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Feb 2011, 10:42 pm by The Legal Blog
Justice D K JainThe Supreme Court in Kanaiyalal Lalchand Sachdev & Ors. v. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 5:01 pm by oliver
Therefore, the [patent proprietor] concluded that for the part of the subject-matter of the claims that did not concern carboxylic acid imides and methyl urea derivatives as components (b) the claim to priority had to be valid.[2.1.4] Claim 1 as granted comprises the following components other than carboxylic acid imides and methyl urea derivatives in group (b): phosphoric acid esters, thiadiazoles, isothiazolinones, imidazoles, guanidines, aromatic carboxylic acids, and… [read post]
15 May 2012, 5:01 pm by Oliver
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]
4 Jan 2008, 3:36 am
She's discussing 401(k) and 403(b) litigation, ERISA matters, and other benefits issues. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm by Oliver
The disclaimer of claim 1 (“non-human”) excludes human beings in order to satisfy A 53(a) while the disclaimers of claims 11 and 14 exclude subject-matter which is not patentable under A 53(b) taken in combination with R 28, paragraphs b) and c). [4] The three disclaimers which exclude subject-matter not eligible for patent protection and only serve the purpose of removing specific legal obstacles do not contribute to the invention. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
Pursuant to A 99(1), first sentence, and R 76(2)(c) the notice of opposition has to contain the following: (a) a statement of the extent to which the EP is opposed and (b) of the grounds on which the opposition is based, as well as (c) an indication of the facts and evidence presented in support of these grounds.[4] For the opposition to be admissible the requirements of R 76(2)(c) have to be satisfied at the expiration of the nine-month TFO. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 5:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
As the claimed plant is defined only by single recombinant DNS sequences it is not a plant variety according to decision G 1/98.Therefore, the subject-matter of the claims does not violate the requirements of A 53(b).To download the whole decision (in German), click here.The file wrapper can be found here. [read post]
18 Apr 2013, 8:27 am
Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/m-i-k-e/4873971916/sizes/n/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/garrettziegler/4883019932/sizes/m/in/photostream/ [read post]
14 May 2014, 7:02 am by Keir D. Gumbs
  Disclosure at the Time of the Event As a threshold matter, federal securities law does not explicitly impose an affirmative duty on issuers to disclose data security breaches or failed attempts to breach a company’s data security. [read post]
21 Aug 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
What is “only by A or by B” supposed to mean? [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 12:06 pm by Mark Wortman
IRAs can be divided through a court order or by transferring one spouse’s share into an IRA account in the other spouse’s name. 401(k) and 403(b) accounts — A 401(k) is a retirement savings plan sponsored by an employer. [read post]
11 May 2022, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
"[T]he possibility that a judgment rendered without the omitted party could have an adverse practical effect on that party is enough to indicate joinder" (Matter of Nemeth v K-Tooling, 163 AD3d 1143, 1144 [2018] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of 27th St. [read post]
11 May 2022, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
"[T]he possibility that a judgment rendered without the omitted party could have an adverse practical effect on that party is enough to indicate joinder" (Matter of Nemeth v K-Tooling, 163 AD3d 1143, 1144 [2018] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of 27th St. [read post]