Search for: "Does 1-35"
Results 8181 - 8200
of 9,553
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Mar 2010, 8:04 am
General Foods Corp (1983) 35 Cal.3d 197, 213-214.) [read post]
21 Mar 2010, 8:04 am
General Foods Corp (1983) 35 Cal.3d 197, 213-214.) [read post]
21 Mar 2010, 5:26 am
What if the property does not have an easily ascertainable value such antique silverware that has been in the family for generations? [read post]
21 Mar 2010, 3:50 am
No.47/96 Present: 1. [read post]
20 Mar 2010, 1:41 pm
The Examiner rejected claims under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
19 Mar 2010, 9:59 pm
In the case at bar, the plaintiff does not have: 1. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 1:28 pm
As Connecting America emphasizes in its executive summary: Public comment on the plan does not end here. [read post]
17 Mar 2010, 3:15 pm
Specifically, in the RID, ALJ Essex determined that: (1) the accused refrigerators do not infringe the asserted claims of the ‘130 patent literally or under the doctrine of equivalents; (2) claims 1, 2, 4, 6, and 9 of the ‘130 patent are invalid under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
17 Mar 2010, 12:09 am
Post #1 is available here, post #2 is here, post #3 is here, and post #4 is here. [read post]
16 Mar 2010, 7:34 pm
What implications does this have on the health care system? [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 2:09 pm
” (“The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public,” Institute of Medicine of the National Academies Committee on the Assessment of the United States Drug Safety System, Sept. 26, 2006) The report noted that “FDA does not have adequate resources or procedures for translating preapproval safety signals into effective post-marketing studies, for monitoring and ascertaining the safety of new marketed drugs, for responding promptly to the… [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 1:53 pm
We’re not going to get to 30 or 35 by 2012, but it would be good if we picked up a few more. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 9:41 am
With regard to 35 U.S.C. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 3:38 am
Solo Cup Co., No 1:07cv897-LMB/TCB (E.D. [read post]
14 Mar 2010, 4:02 pm
A more detailed description can be derived from the figures themselves and from the text on pages 34-36 describing these figures. [5.3] The Board finds that the wording of Claim 1 is for instance more general than the closing mechanism described in embodiment 9A, according to which the reaction wells, bounded by barriers (903), are embossed on the cap (902) […] and the barriers are arranged in such a way as to create a space between adjacent buffer cells (passage bridging pages 34… [read post]
14 Mar 2010, 6:31 am
It is not unreasonable for plaintiff to hope that the situation will improve and, when it does not, to then seek the TRO. [read post]
12 Mar 2010, 11:26 am
In particular, ALJ Charneski determined that the Gouhara reference was not prior art and does not disclose the “reduced resolution mode,” the “resolution mode switch,” or the “means for storing” limitations of independent claim 1 nor the “burst mode” limitation of dependent claim 4. [read post]
12 Mar 2010, 4:30 am
The contest is open until May 1. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 12:52 pm
This means that individuals involuntarily terminated between September 1, 2008 and March 31, 2010 are eligible for 15 months of subsidized COBRA premiums—with the employee paying only 35% of the actual COBRA premium. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 12:37 pm
No. 4140-VCL, slip op. at 35, 36, 41 (Del. [read post]
