Search for: "MATTER OF T A G"
Results 301 - 320
of 5,918
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Feb 2017, 6:32 am
” The court refused to find as a matter of law that a “natural” claim, unmodified by “100%” or “all,” couldn’t plausibly be deceptive. [read post]
7 Feb 2012, 5:01 pm
The criteria developed in G 1/07[6] Before dealing with the criteria of G 1/07 in detail, it is necessary to deal with the proprietor appellants’ assertion that exclusions from patentability should be construed narrowly. [6.1] According to G 1/07 [3.1], a provision containing exclusions or exceptions from patentability is to be interpreted in such a manner that it takes its effect fully and achieves the purpose for which it was designed. [6.2] As further explained in… [read post]
21 Jul 2022, 5:34 pm
When courting outside candidates to fill those roles, they often favored executives from companies such as GE, IBM, and P&G and from professional-services giants such as McKinsey and Deloitte, which had a reputation for cultivating those skills in their managers. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 5:01 pm
As most readers of this blog will be aware of, G 1/93 made the following statement:A feature which has not been disclosed in the application as filed but which has been added to the application during examination and which, without providing a technical contribution to the subject-matter of the claimed invention, merely limits the protection conferred by the patent as granted by excluding protection for part of the subject-matter of the claimed invention as covered by the… [read post]
14 Feb 2020, 7:37 am
Joseph G. [read post]
12 Feb 2019, 6:08 am
In a communication pursuant to Article 15(1) RPBA, the board inter alia raised objections under Article 123(2) EPC and under Article 83 EPC with respect to the subject-matter of the independent method claim.VII. [read post]
2 Feb 2021, 1:37 am
The board thus considers, arguendo, the corresponding case law (see Case Law, V.A.4.10.1, in particular T 1914/12, point 7.2.3) to be good law. [read post]
1 Dec 2009, 3:06 pm
Independent claim 1 is drawn up in the form of a "second (further) medical use claim" as defined in G 5/83. [read post]
9 Oct 2010, 11:01 am
T 958/94 [headnote]). [3.2] … The set of claims of the first auxiliary request contains a Claim 2 directed to a “Procedure for preparing a feed additive, to be used for the prevention of gastric disorders and intestinal diseases … and the product obtained in the hydrolysis is used as such non-fractionated”, which is, in accordance with G 1/83 and T 958/94, in the form of a second medical use. [read post]
20 Nov 2010, 11:01 am
T 934/91 [2-3]; T 843/91 [6-6.3]; and also Case Law, chapters VII.D.10.1 and VII.D.10.2). [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 9:12 am
As a matter of fact, these driving habits were used to predict a teen's chance of having an accident or a near accident after the study. [read post]
29 May 2012, 5:01 pm
[…]Request for referral to the EBA of Appeal (EBA)[5] The appellant requested that, in the event of any of the main request or auxiliary requests 1 and 2 not being granted, three questions be referred to the EBA (in the following “referral questions”) as a divergence existed between, on one hand, decisions T 472/88 and T 975/94 and on the other hand T 868/04 and T 725/08. [read post]
9 Apr 2010, 9:32 pm
I don't think too many people actually say that a particular nomination doesn't matter at all, and most people agree that every nomination could potentially shape the Court's work; but that doesn't mean some nominations don't present more obvious sea-changes in the Court's direction than others. [read post]
6 Oct 2020, 11:11 am
As a quantitative matter, what was copied was a rounding error. [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 3:02 pm
The letter did not specify the subject-matter of the proposed oral submissions. [read post]
9 Aug 2018, 4:00 am
Grace and Wisdom: Patrick G. [read post]
10 Feb 2019, 6:34 am
"Rikki Don’t Lose That Number"? [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 12:22 am
” Hr’g Tr. 10:7-8; see also Hr’g Tr. 7:11-13 (“Instead of a more candid ‘Why didn’t I think of that,’ we get [LTC arguing] ‘Anybody reasonably skilled in the art would have thought of that. [read post]
22 Feb 2019, 3:57 am
The issue of double-patenting has been considered before by the EBA, in G 1/05 and G 1/06. [read post]
15 Feb 2023, 6:21 am
An opposition was filed under Article 100 (a), (b) and (c) EPC against the granted patent on the grounds that the subject-matter of the granted patent lacked novelty and inventive step, was not sufficiently disclosed, and extended beyond the content of the application as filed.III. [read post]
