Search for: ". OD"
Results 501 - 520
of 1,526
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Feb 2011, 3:01 pm
The question facing the Board in the present case is whether the OD had exercised its discretion correctly. [3] Whilst the OD is entitled, pursuant to R 81(1) to examine grounds for opposition not invoked by the opponent, the circumstances in which an OD should consider raising a ground of its own volition are set out in the decisions of the Enlarged Board (EBA) G 9/91 and G 10/91. [read post]
10 Apr 2011, 3:01 pm
Consider a situation where a patent is maintained in amended form by the Opposition Division (OD). [read post]
7 Apr 2009, 8:42 am
The ode badmouthed her hometown. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 3:02 pm
The OD revoked the patent again. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 5:01 pm
Therefore, the appellant cannot claim that the content of the decision of the OD was surprising. [3.5] For these reasons, the decision of the OD complies with the requirements of A 113(1). [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 3:01 pm
When it did so, the OD maintained the patent in amended form. [read post]
4 Mar 2018, 6:41 pm
Ne smijete propasti ako ne biste odustali od tenisica Golden Goose. [read post]
30 Nov 2021, 8:08 am
“DC Moves Toward Array Of Ethics Rules Reforms” — “A submission now being readied for the D.C. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 4:13 pm
20 Sep 2017, 6:35 am
Dan Rodriguez, Dean of Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, will be stepping down at the end of this academic year. [read post]
3 Jul 2015, 8:30 pm
Dinner tonight was barbecued chicken, corn on the cob, and watermelon. [read post]
16 Apr 2013, 5:01 pm
Indeed, the impugned decision is silent with respect to document D25, which has been timely submitted during the opposition procedure by opponent 02 and which both the appellant and respondent 01 confirmed as having been discussed at the OPs before the OD. [read post]
28 Mar 2013, 6:01 pm
The OD only cited some applicable legal provisions without taking account of all the objective facts of the present case. [read post]
24 Dec 2011, 11:01 am
Apart from the fact that ODs can hardly be held to have immediate knowledge of any single decision when it issues, the Board cannot find fault with an OD which does not follow a decision which itself explains why its case is so particular that it warrants departing from otherwise consistent case law. [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 5:01 pm
The OD had then admitted this document and had found claim 1 of the main request to lack inventive step over a combination of documents E15 and E12. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 5:01 pm
It would, however, also have been open to the OD to continue the proceedings of its own motion under R 60(2) EPC 1973 (now R 84(2)). [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 5:01 pm
The OD has expressed the opinion that, considering the entire text of the claim as well as paragraph [0009] of the patent in suit, the missing verb was to be read as “containing”. [read post]
5 Jan 2014, 5:01 pm
After all, the filing date of the application from which the patent in suit derives is 5 December 1991.The fact that the appellants-opponents presented orally a more detailed reasoning in relation to A 123(2) and A 76(1) than their reasoning in writing can be easily explained by the high number of independent claims in the main request and the fact that the OD focused only on claim 1, ignoring the other claims.The so-called “new lines of attack” correspond to the necessary… [read post]
1 Jul 2012, 5:01 pm
Therefore, it is clear from the statement of the grounds of appeal that, according to the Appellant’s opinion, all these objections already raised before the OD still apply to the claims allowed by the OD and form part of the Appellant’s case. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 11:32 pm
♫Thy magic reunites those Whom stern custom has parted; All men will become brothers Under thy gentle wing…♫ Lyrics by Friedrich von Schiller, music by L. van Beethoven, “Ode to Joy“. [read post]
