Search for: "MATTER OF B T B" Results 7261 - 7280 of 19,798
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Sep 2017, 10:00 pm by Jelle Hoekstra
The core decision where this follows from is this decision, T 1329/04. [read post]
8 Sep 2017, 10:48 am by Ron Coleman
By contrast, under § 1071(b) this Court is required to conduct a de novo review. [read post]
8 Sep 2017, 10:03 am by Shane McCall
It didn’t matter to me what the price for each pizza or each lemonade was, as long as the total price was within my budget. [read post]
7 Sep 2017, 1:00 pm by Jamie Markham
If you can’t reside near a school, I guess you can’t reside in one. [read post]
  Document 7: 2015 Certification Exhibit F The subject matter of document 7 is unknown. [read post]
7 Sep 2017, 3:56 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Nevertheless, the motion court correctly determined that the new claims are based on “the same subject matter alleged in the original complaint. [read post]
6 Sep 2017, 11:27 pm by Ben Reeve-Lewis
Such imperatives growing out of having a complex case in the interview room at 10am whilst another waits in reception for 11am, all the while batting away emails from the homelessness unit demanding to know if you can stop the eviction and ergo, protect them from judicial review challenges on placing a homelessness applicant in a bed bug ridden B&B in Luton. [read post]
6 Sep 2017, 6:53 pm by Jon Katz
They don’t seem to care about anyone but themselves, so with them we run for the hills. [read post]
6 Sep 2017, 6:53 pm by Jon Katz
They don’t seem to care about anyone but themselves, so with them we run for the hills. [read post]
6 Sep 2017, 7:13 am by Gritsforbreakfast
Texas isn't California, where a) a federal judge mandated incarceration reductions and b) reformers could put their own proposals on a statewide ballot for an up or down vote. [read post]
5 Sep 2017, 11:15 am
In arriving at the liberalized standard for agency proceedings, the Federal Circuit distinguished between the 112(b) standards used in pre-issuance vs post-issuance disputes, the concurring opinion explained it this way: [A]s a legal matter the USPTO does not have to deal with the presumption of validity the statutes grant to post-issuance patents—sometimes said to hinder [a more liberal test] by courts. [read post]