Search for: "MATTER OF T A AND T R A"
Results 281 - 300
of 53,767
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jul 2016, 10:34 am
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that Brian T. [read post]
22 Sep 2010, 3:02 pm
J 20/85, [4(a)] and J 3/90) and is intended to ensure that the parties to the proceedings are not taken by surprise by grounds mentioned in an adverse decision (cf. inter alia T 669/90; T 892/92; T 594/00 and T 343/01, see “Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO, 5th edition 2006, VI.B.1, page 322). [read post]
24 Jul 2011, 3:01 pm
Of course, had the Board arrived in its deliberation at the end of the OPs at a view which in substance would have been positive for the claimed subject-matter, it would have had to let the procedure under R 112 and/or A 122 run its course.As you might have deduced from the last statement, the Board finally snuffed out the smouldering wick, for lack of compliance of the requests on file with the requirements of A 123(2).To download the whole decision, click here. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 5:01 pm
Consequently, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible in accordance with the provisions of R 65(1) [EPC 1973]. [read post]
12 Nov 2011, 11:01 am
Concerning decisions T 198/01 and T 386/07, the Board observes that the assessment of clarity is dealt with in a different manner. [read post]
9 Jan 2012, 5:01 pm
What happened there is no longer as much the responsibility of the EPO, but rather that of the representative (see T 743/05 [1.6] ; T 1535/10 [1.5.2]). [read post]
31 Oct 2019, 11:26 am
You’ll never get it all done, no matter how hard you try. [read post]
22 Jul 2010, 5:49 am
One bit: “Why Can’t Media Matters Read? [read post]
18 Aug 2011, 3:01 pm
This applies all the more if the unclear feature is essential with respect to the invention in the sense that it is designed for delimiting the subject-matter claimed from the prior art, thereby giving rise to uncertainty as to whether or not the subject-matter claimed is anticipated. [read post]
1 Jan 2014, 5:01 pm
This follows from the consideration that - in accordance with R 43(1) – the invention in the European patent application is defined by the subject-matter of a claim, i.e. the specific combination of features present in the claim, as is reminded in opinion G 2/98 [2] of the Enlarged Board of Appeal. [read post]
[Eugene Volokh] Defendant Has No First Amendment Right to Wear "Black Lives Matter" T-Shirt at Trial
22 Feb 2019, 2:41 pm
The court only prevented Bartell from wearing a Black Lives Matter t-shirt during trial to prevent jury prejudice or distract from the trial. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 5:01 pm
Reference can be made in this respect to established jurisdiction, namely to the decision of the Enlarged Board of Appeal G 9/91 [19] and e.g. decisions T 301/87 [3.8] and T 690/00 [4.1], cf. also Chapter VII.D.4.2 in the Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO, 6th edition, 2010). [2.9] In other words, where - as in the present case - there are multiple requests and a feature common to all requests is held not to meet the requirements of A 84, as a consequence of which higher… [read post]
6 Jun 2008, 12:31 am
DON'T PUT THEM IN SWIMSUITS, PLEASE! [read post]
30 Jul 2012, 5:01 pm
T 1068/07), this board, albeit in a different composition, acknowledged that the subject-matter of the disclaimer present now in claim 1 of the main request was disclosed in the application as filed. [read post]
2 May 2019, 9:08 am
This will help Is marketing boring (and does it matter)? [read post]
4 Apr 2022, 1:05 am
According to the Board of Appeal, there is long-established case law interpreting Art. 84 EPC as requiring the entirety of the description to be consistent with the allowable claims (T 0977/94, r. 6.1; T 0300/04, r. 5; T 1808/06, r. 2). [read post]
3 Jun 2015, 12:42 pm
Recently, our great state once again played host to time-honored sporting event steeped with history and tradition. [read post]
13 Nov 2010, 11:00 am
The residence or principal place of business of the professional representative used is of no relevance in that matter (T 149/85 [6]). [read post]
15 Aug 2019, 10:38 am
If you do, your fees won’t matter. [read post]
31 May 2012, 5:01 pm
Decision T 95/10 identified three reasons for this. [read post]
