Search for: "MATTER OF R T"
Results 301 - 320
of 53,758
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jan 2012, 5:01 pm
As a matter of fact, the reference in R 50(3), in relation to the case of a missing signature, to “the party concerned” indicates that the rule addresses the filing of documents by parties to the procedure, which a person who files third party observations clearly is not, as is expressly stated in A 115 (see the last sentence).The board is aware of decision T 146/07 [3-6], dated the day before the date of the present decision and made public later, in which the… [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 8:25 am
The NYT quoted AT&T as saying it will “vigorously contest this matter in court. [read post]
29 Apr 2022, 12:40 pm
It's not affordable r... [read post]
26 Mar 2009, 4:29 am
The phaonmneal pweor of the human mnid aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a word are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. [read post]
26 Feb 2013, 5:01 pm
Similarly under EPC 1973 (as in force at the time of filing of the original application and of the replacement figures) this was a formal deficiency under R 32(2)(a) in combination with R 40, which could be remedied upon invitation under R 41. [4.4.3] The second reason given by the [opponent] as to why the colour figures should not form the basis of the comparison required under A 123(2) is based on the argument that no information concerning colour figures is available to… [read post]
20 Nov 2013, 5:01 pm
T 2/89 and T 328/87). [read post]
16 Jun 2018, 8:33 am
Just don’t do it. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 12:32 pm
(Can’t see the video embedded in this post? [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 12:10 pm
Don't miss this issue. [read post]
7 Jan 2010, 12:45 pm
Don't miss this issue. [read post]
7 May 2009, 3:50 pm
Don't miss this issue. [read post]
29 Dec 2010, 3:01 pm
T 278/00 and T 897/03), that the decision under appeal be set aside. [read post]
23 Feb 2016, 7:10 am
Doesn't matter. [read post]
13 Dec 2019, 12:15 pm
This week in Other Barks & Bites: Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) gets active on copyright matters, signing a trio of letters related to piracy and Copyright Office matters; Karyn Temple leaves her post as Register of Copyrights at the Copyright Office; the Supreme Court decides Peters v. [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 10:00 pm
But, if you can’t attend in person, the good news is that you don’t have to be there, or even in the state of Florida, to attend. [read post]
30 Oct 2017, 5:31 am
The claims presently on file differ from the claims not allowed in T 1676/11, for example, in that the claims refused under T 1676/11 included product claims whereas the requests presently on file contain only process claims, the subject-matter of said process claims differing substantially from the process claims decided upon in T 1676/11. [read post]
11 Nov 2012, 5:01 pm
The petitioner explains that it had relied on the admission of MEO2 to the proceedings, whereas the [opponent] argues that the petitioner could have requested a decision on that matter, which it had not done. [2] However, the [opponent] has qualified its statement at a later time in such a way that the dispute between the parties is in large part irrelevant. [read post]
5 Jul 2022, 10:32 am
In Antitrust Matters, we bring you perspectives of experts and visionaries in the field who discuss where antitrust law has been, where it is going, and why it matters today more than ever before. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 12:20 pm
To be sure, the right answer is probably that both matter, but my guess is that relative pay matters more. [read post]
15 Sep 2021, 7:25 am
Doesn’t matter a lot, but the court does seem to conflate them.)http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default? [read post]
