Search for: "Application of Alexander"
Results 81 - 100
of 1,848
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Nov 2023, 7:15 am
Obviousness Ultimately, following a thorough statement of the applicable principles on the law of obviousness, and a lengthy analysis of a number of issues relating to each of three pieces of prior art, Mellor J held that on the correct construction of Integer A, Claim 1 was not obvious (interestingly, he said that on Astellas’ own proposed construction, Claim 1 would have been obvious). [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 3:19 am
This means that, even if the PI application were not dismissed, it should be stayed pending the outcome of those TBA proceedings. [read post]
30 Oct 2023, 6:10 am
Finally the Applicant refers to previous correspondence between the representatives of both parties and most recent summons being all written in English, and states that the reasons given by the claimants in the main proceedings – here the Respondents – for not translating their productions in Dutch are all valid and therefore support the Application. [read post]
27 Oct 2023, 4:42 am
Background A divisional patent application is a separate one that is derived from an initial (parent) application. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 7:17 pm
” Read, “Netflix indicted on felony charges in Texas for ‘Cuties,’ promoting ‘lewd material of children’,” written by Bryan Alexander and published by USA TODAY on October 7, 2020. 3. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 4:44 pm
Floyd Alexander-Hunt is an LLM candidate at Queen Mary University London and a research assistant at K [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 3:56 am
Israel already refused a visa application by the U.N. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 2:20 am
This is because divisional applications, although considered as independent applications, are deemed to be in the same examination moment of the parent patent application. [read post]
23 Oct 2023, 9:01 pm
(Id. at 140).ConclusionWe await the final rule and the FTC discussion of the comments and other materials in the rulemaking record.[1] Section 5.02(d) of the Employment Restatement provides that employers are subject to liability under the “public policy” tort, recognized in most states, for retaliating against job applicants and employees who “refuse[] to waive a nonnegotiable or nonwaivable right as a condition of employment”.[2] Matthew Johnson, Kurt Lavetti &… [read post]
23 Oct 2023, 2:56 am
Perhaps, also to avoid legal uncertainty and guarantee a uniform application of rules when it comes to SEPs, new legislation is needed in India to clarify what FRAND terms mean, and the obligations stemming from a FRAND promise. [read post]
17 Oct 2023, 3:40 pm
The PRJ considered that Grünenthal’s application fulfilled above test. [read post]
17 Oct 2023, 2:26 am
In Re D [2008] 1 WLR 1499 at [27] Lord Carswell approved what had been said by Richards LJ in R (N) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) [2006] QB 468 at [62] who had said, ‘Although there is a single civil standard of proof on the balance of probabilities, it is flexible in its application. [read post]
12 Oct 2023, 2:43 am
’ On the Pinsent Masons website, Julia Traumann writes ‘burdens will attach to preliminary patent injunction applications’. [read post]
6 Oct 2023, 9:30 pm
Lawbook Exchange’s October 2023 catalogue is here.ICYMI: Alexander Keyssar and Thomas Wolf on the Supreme Court's Originalism (Newsweek). [read post]
6 Oct 2023, 2:43 pm
Alexander, Esq., and Christopher J. [read post]
5 Oct 2023, 6:37 pm
To my great delight, I was asked to review Jan Broekman's brilliant new work, Knowledge in Change: The Semiotics of Cognition and Conversation (Springer Nature, 2023). [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 9:00 am
Growing up, Christa Alexander always wanted to pursue a career in law. [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 7:41 am
This repository contains a collection of information for researchers, journalists, educators, scholars, and the public at large. [read post]
30 Sep 2023, 11:01 am
Alexander J. [read post]
29 Sep 2023, 3:05 am
The fact that the Application concerns a revocation action concerning a European patent which, as argued by the Applicant, “confers rights on the patent proprietor(s) with erga omnes effect”, does not make this assessment different. [read post]
