Search for: "MATTER OF T A G"
Results 381 - 400
of 5,921
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Feb 2011, 3:01 pm
However, the disclaimer should not remove more than is necessary to achieve this (see G 1/93 [headnote 2.2]). [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 2:40 pm
Koleske, Editor, 1995, pages 23-25D6: BYK Additives & Instruments, Product Guide L-G 1, Paint Additives, February 2009D7: WO 2011/084380 A1.V. [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 6:13 pm
It doesn’t matter whether the corporation is profitable or even if it has any revenue. [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 6:13 pm
It doesn’t matter whether the corporation is profitable or even if it has any revenue. [read post]
3 Apr 2020, 1:08 pm
A new Board of Immigration Appeals decision, Matter of J-J-G, 27 I&N Dec. 808 (BIA 2020) has made it more difficult for foreign nationals to obtain Cancellation of Removal. [read post]
10 Feb 2010, 3:01 pm
It does not matter that the claim can also be read in such a way that it does not add subject-matter. [read post]
8 Jun 2011, 3:01 pm
G 1/93 [headnote 2] indicates a last possible way out:“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 application as filed,… [read post]
5 Jul 2019, 5:00 am
On appeal, the Metropolitan Court of Appeal (Fővárosi Ítélőtábla) set aside the ground for refusal concerning the technical function but upheld the refusal for all goods on the basis of the substantial value. [read post]
19 Mar 2019, 8:36 am
In particular, it would not have been obvious to arrive at the subject-matter of independent claims 1 and 11 when starting from either D1 or D7.XI. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 3:01 pm
In G 1/93 […] it is stated that “If a European patent as granted contains subject-matter which extends beyond the content of the application as filed within the meaning of A 123(2) and which also limits the scope of protection conferred by the patent, such patent cannot be maintained in opposition proceedings unamended, because the ground for opposition under A 100(c) prejudices the maintenance of the patent. [read post]
7 Feb 2019, 4:47 pm
Having a criminal record is a serious matter. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 11:46 pm
The subject-matter of claim 1 and dependent claim 2 was the same as the subject-matter of independent claim 23 and dependent claim 24 of the parent application as originally filed.b) In the European Search Opinion based on the application as originally filed it was held that- neither the subject-matter of independent claim 3 and dependent claims 6 to 8, nor the description of the application were in conformity with Article 76(1) EPC, and- the subject-matter of… [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 5:01 pm
Once this has been proven, it is possible to take into account evidence that has been published at a later stage in order to support these conclusions (see T 609/02 [9]).[3] In the present case, the patent does not provide any experimental data establishing that a plasmid expressing the G gene can induce a protective response against rabies in canidae.[4] However, the OD has pointed out, in substance, that at the date under consideration there was no use of polynucleotide vaccines… [read post]
3 Oct 2022, 12:25 pm
“If B&G didn’t want consumers to think that the can contained butter, one wonders why it said ‘Butter,’ front and center. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 3:01 pm
Argument (g) is more interesting:(g) In a similar situation in decision T 211/95 [4.3.3;4.4], the board held that it was clear to the person skilled in the art that the earlier application contained two different teachings, the two teachings each pertaining to a different problem, and realised by different, independent technical features. [read post]
7 Aug 2007, 6:11 am
don't buy this painting: Or this one: [read post]
17 Aug 2010, 3:01 pm
The expression “elements” has to be understood as relating to separable alternative embodiments (G 2/98 [4. and 6.7]). [read post]
11 Apr 2012, 5:01 pm
The discussion specifically concerned the feature (a) which relates to “an array of fluidic elements, at least some of the fluidic elements comprising fluidic amplifiers, the array having a face plate and a back plate” (reference numerals omitted). [5.1.1] An interpretation of the claimed subject-matter may be made by taking into account the whole context of the disclosure of the patent (decision T 467/02 [2.3]). [read post]
9 Dec 2008, 3:05 pm
As the college football bowl season ramps up, I thought that a recent paper by Devin G. [read post]
28 Jun 2016, 11:43 am
As Ahmad explains, “[g]iven the ever-changing regulatory landscape, directors and officers are getting involved in matters earlier and earlier and in a wider range of situations than before. [read post]
