Search for: "C. G., Matter of" Results 641 - 660 of 3,607
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Aug 2019, 6:03 am
" | Enlarged Board of Appeal in G 1/18 | Beyond exclusion of pharmaceutical products from patentable subject matter as a solution to limited access to medicines in Africa | ‘Cartography and Copyright’ | Warhol v Goldsmith: fairness of use by iconic artwork adjudicated in New York. | English High Court raises eyebrows over request to disclose ISP customer data | The EU Regulation on fairness in the platform economy is a let down for intellectual property | Vallenato… [read post]
3 Mar 2025, 6:12 am by Staff Attorney
As a result of the conduct described herein, Respondents violated Section 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Act (prohibiting violations of MSRB Rules), and MSRB Rules G-17 and G-42 and Hamlin Advisors violated Section 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Action (fiduciary duty) and MSRB Rule G-44. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
Whereas method claims are absolutely forbidden in order to leave the physician free to act unfettered, product claims are allowable provided their subject-matter is new and inventive (G 2/08 [5.7]). [read post]
30 Aug 2010, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
In particular, the [patent proprietor] pointed out that - in example 3 of document D7 300 g/h of N-vinyl- 2-pyrrolidone were fed into the distillation column whereas only 185 g/h of pure N-vinyl-2- pyrrolidone were withdrawn from the column under steady state condition, which meant that only 62% of the N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidone was recovered […]. [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 9:07 am by Joel R. Brandes
However, 22 NYCRR 202.16(g)(2) provides that in the discretion of the court, written expert reports may be used to substitute for direct testimony at the trial. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 1:19 am by Falk Metzler
It does not matter whether or not the claim comprises additional non-technical features, which may charachterize the claimed teaching. [read post]
30 Jan 2023, 2:46 am by Guest Author
If they are users’ speech, section 230(c)(1) protects Google (as YouTube’s parent company) from being treated as the publisher in causes of action, such as defamation, in which being a publisher matters. [read post]
10 Jul 2010, 11:02 am by Oliver G. Randl
The examination would then have been conducted on the basis of all claims (see T 631/97 and the Guidelines for Examination, C-III, 7.10, and C-VI, 3.1-4). [3.5.3] The equivalent rule under the EPC 2000 is R 164. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 7:59 am by David Smith
The High Court criticised the basis on which the Tribunal had approached this matter. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 7:59 am by David Smith
The High Court criticised the basis on which the Tribunal had approached this matter. [read post]
7 Jul 2007, 9:20 am
The State Government also filed an affidavit consenting to follow the practice which was adopted for the previous academic year in the matter of admission of students by private colleges and making it clear that they do not insist that the self-financing colleges should follow the single window system. [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 3:07 pm by Stephen Halbrook
In a footnote on page 15 of its reply brief, the Government notes that an amicus brief filed by certain Professors of Second Amendment Law accepts "the validity of Section 922(g)(8)(C)(i) because it 'requires a judicial finding of dangerousness' but reject[s] Section 922(g)(8)(C)(ii) because it does not require a specific finding. [read post]