Search for: "Modified Opinion filed 3/1/10" Results 261 - 280 of 729
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Apr 2018, 12:28 pm by Susan Klein
” In 2015, Chavez-Meza filed a pro-se motion under Section 3582(c)(2) asking the district court to modify his sentence. [read post]
12 Apr 2018, 12:11 am by Roel van Woudenberg
The appellant requests that the decision under appeal be set aside and a patent be granted on the basis of claims 1 to 11 of one of auxiliary requests III to V, all filed on 22 December 2017, or on the basis of claims 1 to 9 of auxiliary request VI filed during the oral proceedings.The further text on file is:description pages1 to 7 as originally filed;drawing sheets1 and 2 as originally filed.VIII. [read post]
12 Apr 2018, 12:11 am by Roel van Woudenberg
The appellant requests that the decision under appeal be set aside and a patent be granted on the basis of claims 1 to 11 of one of auxiliary requests III to V, all filed on 22 December 2017, or on the basis of claims 1 to 9 of auxiliary request VI filed during the oral proceedings.The further text on file is:description pages1 to 7 as originally filed;drawing sheets1 and 2 as originally filed.VIII. [read post]
24 Jan 2018, 6:38 am by Roel van Woudenberg
European patent No. 1 773 302, filed on 16 February 2005 and claiming the priority date of 23 July 2004 from US application 10/898061 (D1), was opposed on the ground that its subject-matter lacked novelty and inventive step (Article 100(a) EPC) and was insufficiently disclosed (Article 100(b) EPC).The following documents were among those cited during the first-instance proceedings:D1: US2005/0152971 (application No. 10/898061), filed on 23 July 2004,… [read post]
24 Jan 2018, 6:38 am by Roel van Woudenberg
European patent No. 1 773 302, filed on 16 February 2005 and claiming the priority date of 23 July 2004 from US application 10/898061 (D1), was opposed on the ground that its subject-matter lacked novelty and inventive step (Article 100(a) EPC) and was insufficiently disclosed (Article 100(b) EPC).The following documents were among those cited during the first-instance proceedings:D1: US2005/0152971 (application No. 10/898061), filed on 23 July 2004,… [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 6:28 pm by Jeff Gittins
Gage FroererHouse Bill 103 modifies water conservation plan requirements in Utah Code section 73-10-32. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 5:08 am
The DecisionIn oral proceedings, the EPO upheld its preliminary opinion that the priority claim was invalid, and that disclosures between the filing date of the US provisionals and the filing date of the PCT application were citeable against the claims. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 12:01 pm by ligitsec
The injunction was slightly modified by written opinion on August 10, 2000. [read post]
27 Nov 2017, 2:18 am by Jelle Hoekstra
The main request, auxiliary request 1 and auxiliary request 3 were filed on 15 October 2015. [read post]