Search for: "T. R. T."
Results 441 - 460
of 304,489
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jan 2013, 5:01 pm
Thus the formula may be corrected pursuant to R 139 to read:VT* = rnd (QR/10∙ CV).Representative value QR[2.4.1] The numerical example contains two obvious mistakes. [read post]
9 Jan 2012, 5:01 pm
What happened there is no longer as much the responsibility of the EPO, but rather that of the representative (see T 743/05 [1.6] ; T 1535/10 [1.5.2]). [read post]
10 Mar 2009, 12:14 pm
Bu kavrama üç t? [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 3:01 pm
This means that, contrary to the suggestion of the [patent proprietors], the board’s decision concerning A 123(2) is not res judicata and was open to challenge, for example by an opponent citing A 100(c) in the notice of opposition; this would be comparable to the situations arising in T 1099/06 and T 167/93. [read post]
11 Oct 2019, 2:37 am
Compared to the claims of the auxiliary request B2 and B3, this procedure thus represents a change in the submission within the meaning of Article 13 (1) RPBA.The decisions T 1621/09, T 607/10 and T 55/11 cited by the complainant cannot invalidate this circumstance. [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 9:43 am
r? [read post]
28 Feb 2017, 2:13 am
It finds that R.137(5) does not apply since the request corresponds to a combination of the original claims. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 10:00 am
H&R Block Messes Up Bruce Wayne's Taxes: H&R Block has corrected its mistake: Don't Mess With Taxes, Holy Amended Tax Infographic, Batman! [read post]
7 May 2018, 2:00 am
Don’t shortchange the résumé review. [read post]
7 May 2018, 2:00 am
Don’t shortchange the résumé review. [read post]
29 Aug 2010, 3:01 pm
The question arises as to whether the behaviour of the ED in the proceedings up to refusal deprived the applicant of the right to be heard (A 113(1)), and whether the decision was sufficiently reasoned (R 68(2)). [4.3] Decision T 939/92 referred to by the appellant in the statement of grounds of appeal (followed for instance in T 1242/04 [9.2]) sets out that A 54(2) does not limit the state of the art to written disclosure in specific documents. [read post]
23 Aug 2011, 3:01 pm
The fact that the recipient (here: the PR) takes notice of the mail only several days or even weeks after [the receipt] is not relevant because the only legal condition, i.e. the delivery to him, is fulfilled (T 247/98 [1]; T 172/04 [4]; T 743/05 [1.6-8]; T 261/07 [1.6]; T 529/09 [4]).Decision T 703/92, which has been invoked by the [opponent] is not to be understood differently. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 2:10 pm
R is for Required Minimum Distributions. [read post]
26 Jun 2010, 11:01 am
This failure amounts to a substantial procedural violation requiring that the decision under appeal to be set aside and the case be remitted to the first instance (see T 278/00). [read post]
2 Sep 2011, 4:00 pm
The H&R trial, due to begin Tuesday, is likely to be watched closely in light of the Justice Department’s AT&T challenge. [read post]
25 May 2009, 3:48 pm
Dans le document imprimable que vous visualisez ci-après, j'ai effectué un aperçu général du régime juridique des fondations panaméennes d'intérêt privé. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 9:00 pm
A ses yeux, il s'agissait de répondre à un fax de la division d'opposition indiquant que si les parties souhaitaient entendre un témoin, [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 3:01 pm
In contrast to R 51(3) EPC 1973, which has remained unchanged as to its substance when becoming R 71(2)EPC 2000:A 94(3) has undergone some change (as compared to A 96(2) EPC 1973):and R 137(2) and (3) as in force today is quite different from R 86(2) and (3) EPC 1973:If my understanding of the situation is correct, nowadays the applicant uses its single opportunity to amend without the consent of the ED when answering the notification under R 70a (or… [read post]
11 Mar 2015, 12:35 am
Here's the idea: Cette réunion a pour objectif de rapprocher les sociétés savantes nationales et régionales dont le but est la défense et l’étude du droit international, en permettant l’établissement d’un cadre de réflexion autour de leur rôle, des moyens à mettre en œuvre afin de renforcer leur coopération, ainsi que des attentes que peuvent avoir les… [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 5:01 pm
(b) One of the purposes of file inspection is to enable the public to obtain information about the patent, being information to which it is entitled in return for the exclusive monopoly rights which the patent confers (indeed, this is the “paramount” purpose of file inspection according to the Board in T 1401/05 [5]).[3.3] Examples where file inspection would not have served the purpose of informing the public about the patent are to be found in the decisions T 379/01,… [read post]
