Search for: "MATTER OF T A AND T R A" Results 321 - 340 of 53,767
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Oct 2012, 9:12 pm by VMaryAbraham
I had the pleasure of presenting with Maura R. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 5:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
So the Enlarged Board has made clear (for instance in R 15/10)  that the Boards do not have to indicate their opinion before taking a decision. [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
Procedural matters[4] According to R 115(2), if a party duly summoned to OPs does not appear as summoned, the proceedings may continue without that party. [read post]
26 May 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
Moreover, it is unknown whether this document was indeed made available to clients without there being any obligation of secrecy and whether it has been sent to the clients at all.The arguments made in respect of document D2 also apply to document D13 in an analogous way.[1.3.3] As far as the decisions T 804/05, T 743/89 and T 55/01 are concerned, the Board is of the following opinion:Decision T 804/05 dealt with the public availability of an advertising leaflet,… [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 5:01 pm by oliver
R 10/09 [3.2]; R 11/11 [9]; T 144/09 [1.14]). [read post]
11 Sep 2020, 5:48 am by Rasha Zeyadeh
The post Implicit Bias in the Workplace – Just Because it isn’t Blatant, Does Not Mean it isn’t There appeared first on Dallas Employment Lawyer Blog. [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
According to the jurisprudence of the boards of appeal the standard of disclosure for this requirement is that it must be possible to reproduce the invention on the basis of the original application documents without any inventive effort and undue burden, whereby the skilled person may use his common general knowledge to supplement the information contained in the application, textbooks and general technical literature forming part of the common general knowledge (see e.g. decisions T… [read post]
18 May 2012, 5:56 am by Greenberg & Bederman
It doesn’t matter if the case is a murder trial or a squabble over the size of a hedge between two houses. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 5:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
It has been established by the case law of the Boards of appeal (6th edition, 2010, VI.D.4.1.3a) that the addition of a dependent claim cannot possibly be a response to an objection that the claimed subject-matter (the process of claim 1) is not patentable because it neither limits nor amends the subject-matter claimed in the relevant independent claim (claim 1). [read post]
12 Jul 2022, 12:14 am by Roel van Woudenberg
However, examining divisions should make sure that an internet disclosure used as state of the art is reliable in terms of both the publication date (see decision T 1066/13, Reasons 4 to 4.3; see also the Guidelines for Examination in the EPO, G-IV, 7.5.1) and continued accessibility to its content in the version made publicly accessible on that date (see decision T 3071/19, Reasons 5; see also T 0013/20, Reasons 4).9. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 4:06 pm by Oliver G. Randl
In a communication accompanying the summons to oral proceedings (OPs) the ED informed the applicant that the claims were not acceptable under R 137(3). [read post]
10 Feb 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
T 258/03 [headnote 1] and G 3/08 [10.7]).[5.1] This dispels the only objection that has been directly raised against the original method claims. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 3:02 pm by Oliver G. Randl
Decision T 870/92 [3.1] comes to the same conclusion by applying R 20(3) and R 61, which as such only govern the effect of a legal transfer on the side of the applicant patent proprietor. [read post]
5 Mar 2008, 1:18 pm
Link: Rocket Matter - The web generation of legal software - Blog. [read post]
29 Nov 2012, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
It is part of the professional task of representatives to decide independently – that is, without assistance from the Board – how to pursue their cases (see T 506/91 [2.3]). [read post]
24 May 2012, 5:01 pm by Oliver
The discussion of this matter by the Board is quite interesting:[3.1] The essence of the [opponent’s] attack on sufficiency of disclosure was that the LTC temperature range covered by claim 1 of the main request was not well-defined, since any information with regard to the heating rate to be applied during the heating step for the determination of the LTC temperature was missing. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 10:23 am by Glenn Reynolds
DAILY CALLER: Media Matters Wants A Fight But Can’t Take A Punch. “After facing down more than a month of tough reporting, David Brock’s Media Matters for America still has nothing to say for itself. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
T 290/86 [3.2])T 36/83[3.2.2] In case T 36/83 the Board came to the conclusion that the uses disclosed for thenoyl peroxide were of both therapeutic (acne) and cosmetic nature (comedolytic effect). [read post]