Search for: "DOES 1-12"
Results 7441 - 7460
of 28,896
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Oct 2019, 6:12 am
§ 101(e)(1) owned by the U.S. [read post]
28 May 2024, 9:11 am
Though school is out for many, the FCC does not take a summer recess. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 3:01 pm
However, the decision was based on D4 alone.The right to be heard (A 113(1) EPC 1973)[2.1] Claim 1 of the main request filed in response to the summons to OPs, on which the decision under appeal was based, combines in particular features of claims 1, 12 and 13 as originally filed. [read post]
19 Sep 2018, 9:19 pm
Laying house 11 – One (1) live rodent in the manure pit, one (1) live rodent on the bird platform, one (1) dead rodent, and rodent burrows observed in the manure piles and the large gravel in the front of the laying house Laying house 5 – Three (3) live rodents downstairs, in rows 4 and 5 Laying house 8 – Two (2) live rodents downstairs, in rows 1 and 4 Laying house 6 – One (1) live rodent, in row 1 pit area Laying house 2… [read post]
8 Nov 2022, 5:31 am
The Ninth Circuit precedent has consistently held that Section 230(e)(1) applies only to criminal prosecutions and, in Jane Doe 1 v. [read post]
17 Oct 2017, 9:37 am
On September 12, the U.K. [read post]
13 Oct 2016, 6:50 am
Amgen Inc., et al., No. 16-332 (effectively extending exclusivity to 12 1/2 years; complement to the Sandoz petition) Eligibility: Trading Technologies International, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 1:04 pm
Some of these will be not worth the paper they are written on, but many are genuine claims and to ignore them when considering the court statistics is to miss most of what the court does. [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 12:23 pm
San Francisco does not appear on that list, because, as we’ve previously discussed, San Francisco set the standard for a higher minimum wage way back in 2003. [read post]
27 Dec 2021, 9:41 am
The February 1, 2022 deadline is extended for workers if their recommended booster date falls after February 1. [read post]
19 Dec 2015, 9:46 pm
” Somerset does provide: distribution of medicine, meals at an in-house restaurant, a 24-hour emergency call system and a transportation system. [read post]
15 Dec 2017, 7:38 am
As of December 14, 2017, the FTC website listing docketing events for this case (https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/141-0200/1-800-contacts-inc-matter) has not been updated since November 16, 2017, and therefore does not indicate whether 1-800 Contacts filed a timely appeal to the Commission. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm
Combining these two and stating that G 2/10 has added criteria to G 1/03 does not sound right to me. [read post]
21 Aug 2017, 3:35 pm
Unless specifically outlined by law, carrying a loaded firearm on any school grounds will result in criminal charges under Arizona’s Weapons Misconduct law A.R.S. 13- 3102(12). [read post]
21 Aug 2017, 3:35 pm
Unless specifically outlined by law, carrying a loaded firearm on any school grounds will result in criminal charges under Arizona’s Weapons Misconduct law A.R.S. 13- 3102(12). [read post]
11 Sep 2011, 8:54 pm
§ 49:3-56(g)(1) exempts from investment adviser registration any person that “has a place of business in [New Jersey] and during any period of 12 consecutive months that person does not have more than five clients, who are residents of [New Jersey]. [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 1:52 pm
Where a person alleges that a defendant has committed contempt of an order entered pursuant to the provisions of P.L.1981, c.426 (C.2C:25-1 et seq.) or P.L.1991, c.261, but where a law enforcement officer has found that there is not pro [read post]
15 Dec 2019, 5:45 pm
No APC but does charge page fees. [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 1:00 am
Specifically, the case focused on the difference between example 9 of Rowenhorst and example 1 of EP 2 373 458 (para 146) (the Patent referred to the US patent application 12/337,001; EP 2 373 458 is derived from US ’001 and contains the same relevant disclosure as US ’001). [read post]
23 Nov 2020, 12:45 am
"Reasons for the decision1. explicit method stepsIt is undisputed that the wording of claim 1 does not include an explicit method step which would be considered surgical within the meaning of Article 53(c) EPC.2. implicit method steps2.1 It is not necessary for a claim to explicitly include a surgical method step for it to be excluded from patentability. [read post]
