Search for: "Matter of B I and N G" Results 21 - 40 of 803
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Dec 2020, 12:02 pm by Patricia Hughes
In my November 3rd Slaw post on the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Fraser, I considered the division on the Court relating to the interpretation of section 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 1:47 pm by Matthew Kolken
 See Matter of Robert BAUTISTA, 25 I&N Dec. 616 (BIA 2011).The BIA used the categorical approach set forth in Taylor v. [read post]
27 Aug 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
As a consequence of the listing of the non-ionic polymers (b) the subject-matter of auxiliary request 2 is novel over the disclosure of document D2 because this document does not disclose these particular polymers (b) in combination with the copolymer (a) and cetyltrimethylammonium chloride (c). [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
 Not an easy read, though.Amendments[2] Compared to claim 1 as originally filed, claim 1 of the main request has been amended by (i) restricting the definition of component (A) from “an organic C2-8 dicarboxylic acid or salt thereof” to malic acid or a salt thereof, (ii) restricting the definition of component (B) from “at least one or more of an organic solvent selected from the group consisting of aromatic alcohols, N-alkylpyrrolidones, alkylene… [read post]
7 Jun 2023, 8:30 am by Guest Author
Bush Administration OIRA head Susan Dudley and former EPA policy official Brian Mannix write that, “[i]n principle, a benefit-cost analysis should be ‘complete. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 3:18 pm by PaulKostro
. __ (2010), A-62-09, June 21, 2010: Rule 804(b)(6) expressly provides that, “[i]n a civil proceeding, a statement made by a person unavailable as a witness because of death [is not excluded by the hearsay rule] if the statement was made in good faith upon declarant’s personal knowledge in circumstances indicating that it is trustworthy. [read post]
6 Oct 2020, 11:11 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Ass’n.: Didn’t participate in this case b/c we have members on both sides. [read post]
3 Sep 2011, 11:01 am by Oliver G. Randl
Here is another textbook example of a disclaimer that does not fulfil the requirements established in G 1/03.The patent proprietor filed an appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division to revoke the opposed patent.The Board found the (main) request I to lack novelty over document D1 (prior art under A 54(3)(4)), and auxiliary requests II and III not to comply with A 123(2). [read post]
5 Feb 2023, 7:38 pm by Michael Froomkin
I was very honored to be asked to write the preface for Un droit de l’intelligence artificielle: entre règles sectorielles et régime général. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 11:59 pm by Roel van Woudenberg
By letter dated 1 February 2019, the appellant commented on the board's preliminary opinion and filed the following documents:N1 Minutes of the proceedings of Main Committee I of the Munich Diplomatic Conference for the setting up of a European System for the Grant of Patents, document M/PR/I, No 199 to 211, 665 to 669, and 857 to 867;Report on the results of Main Committee I's proceedings, Annex I to document M/PR/I, page 188;Report on the… [read post]
5 Jul 2015, 3:49 pm
I had heard that changes were coming, but I didn’t know what they were until very recently. [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 2:05 pm
Fred (thinking): "That f-n headhunter promised me I would be supporting the President on matters of national importance. [read post]