Search for: "art@law"
Results 7501 - 7520
of 39,033
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Aug 2012, 7:00 am
” Filed under: archaeology law, Museums [read post]
9 Jul 2011, 4:00 am
As reported here by YOU ME Patent & Law Firm, revised Article 42, paragraph 3 of the Korean Patent Act requires, for any application filed on or after 1 July 2011, that ‘the specification must describe background technology of the invention. [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 6:19 am
via art-crime.blogspot.com [read post]
1 Jul 2021, 6:46 am
Teaching away does not exclude use of a publication as closest prior art. [read post]
27 Oct 2007, 11:03 pm
Widowed and a single mother at age 25, she moved to the home of her in-laws in Paris. [read post]
6 May 2009, 1:52 pm
The Court then directed Plaintiff to respond to all requests that concern issues of fact or the application of law to fact, but advised that the Plaintiff need not respond to any requests that (i) concern legal conclusions, such as whether certain art constitutes "prior art" to the patent in suit, or (ii) require more than a "reasonable inquiry" to answer. [read post]
22 Mar 2016, 7:31 am
Artists such as Christo certainly make classification of art more difficult, but that is probably the point of the art. [read post]
6 Sep 2016, 2:56 am
EU law is thus applicable to Art. 24 German Copyright Act as far as it relates to parodies. [read post]
21 Aug 2013, 3:46 am
So far as student law clinics are concerned, he cites Queen Mary London's Law for the Arts advice centre, here. [read post]
9 May 2013, 4:27 am
It is inevitable that senior courts are more generalist and less specialised in technical areas of the law such as patent law. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 7:09 pm
That argument runs contrary to our case law. [read post]
3 Dec 2022, 2:55 pm
Nikki is a 2022 fall legal intern at the Center for Art Law. [read post]
5 May 2011, 11:39 am
Along with his many skills and energy he brought with him an impressive art collection some of which he generously donated to the law library. [read post]
12 Feb 2017, 6:54 am
There was some dispute as to whether or not the Defendant's status as a Spanish company meant it could only be sued in Spain on the basis that this was the country where it is domiciled (Art 97(1) of the Regulation) and the EU Member State in which the act of infringement was committed (Art 97(5) of the Regulation).However, Art 94 of the Regulation modifies the position in Art 97 so that the general rule is that the EU rules on jurisdiction apply… [read post]
17 Dec 2015, 11:40 am
One asks, is a negation of an argument that prior art "taught away" the same thingas saying the prior art suggested a "reasonable expectation of success"? [read post]
15 Jun 2017, 9:02 am
The conclusionFor the foregoing reasons, we hold that Campbell ’558is prior art under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 1:14 pm
Stryker gives various statements of law“[T]his court has expressly rejected the contentionthat if a patent describes only a single embodiment, theclaims of the patent must be construed as being limited tothat embodiment. [read post]
6 Oct 2020, 7:55 am
” The district court granted Biogen’s motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) because the prior art did not disclose the use of recombinant IFN-β. [read post]
3 Jun 2013, 5:01 pm
Consequently, it must be concluded that entries may only be reliably compared within the three sets of data (i.e. that provided in the patent in suit, and by the [patent proprietor] and [opponent], respectively).[3.3.4] In so far as “excellent protection against the loss of copper” implies an improvement over the closest prior art […], the board is not convinced that the data outlined under point [3.3.3] provide adequate experimental support that this has successfully… [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 11:46 pm
After a series of setbacks that Apple suffered against Ericsson, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Cameron Elliot handed the iPhone maker its first--partial and non-final, yet significant--win in that dispute: a claim construction order that greatly increases the likelihood of Apple avoiding an import ban over two of the three patents Ericsson is asserting in the last-filed and smallest one of this year's ITC complaints. [read post]
