Search for: "Matter of T C" Results 81 - 100 of 18,053
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Nov 2018, 9:33 am by Kevin Kaufman
The lack of case law directly addressing the matter suggests that the city should expect a legal battle before the measure is implemented, a battle they are at risk of losing. [read post]
21 Jul 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
Any disclosure in the description inconsistent with the amended subject-matter should normally be excised. [read post]
18 Apr 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
As a matter of fact, this particular approach to novelty only applies to claims directed at the use of a substance or composition for a method within the meaning of A 52(4) EPC 1973 (now A 53(c)).Claim 1 of the main request is drafted according to the model proposed by decision G 6/83, i.e. the use of a substance for the manufacture of a composition intended for a specific use. [read post]
21 Feb 2009, 7:41 am
The Court of Justice has handed down its judgment in Case C-185/07 West Tankers and the result is as expected. [read post]
4 Sep 2008, 8:41 pm
The Court of Justice has handed down a major judgment in Joined Cases C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat Foundation v. [read post]
23 Mar 2013, 12:01 pm by oliver randl
The Board won’t allow such reasonings:A 123(2)[2.1] The preamble and features (a), (c) and (f) of claim 1 are disclosed in originally filed claim 1 and at page 2, line 28 - page 3, line 3 of the description of the application as filed. [read post]
19 Nov 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
J 10/07, T 1366/04, T 1279/05). [read post]
12 Feb 2023, 8:01 am by David Adelstein
Whether you like it or not, and whether you appreciate the significance of the provisions, they matter. [read post]
15 Apr 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
The claim defined the N-terminal and C-terminal amino acid of the protein and specified the human t-Pa activator function. [11] The first priority document disclosed the used starting material and hybridisation probes and it contained figure 4 in identical form as the patent. [read post]
12 May 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
Therefore, as the Boards of Appeal have repeatedly held, whether or not the disclosure is sufficient, is a matter to be decided on the circumstances of each individual case. [read post]
5 Jan 2022, 1:25 am by Rose Hughes
 Changing the definition of the claims in the summary of the prior artThe decision (T 471/20) related to an appeal from the Opposition Division to revoke the patent on the grounds that the subject-matter of the patent extended beyond the content of the application as filed (Article 100(c) EPC). [read post]
27 Sep 2022, 7:16 am by Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff
” According to the Federal Circuit, what matters for Type C PTA is that “[t]he adverse determination of unpatentability remained before and after the appeal. [read post]
14 Oct 2013, 1:35 am by Laura Sandwell
In the matter of “The Alexandros T” (Nos. 1, 2 and 3), heard 8 – 9 July 2013. [read post]
24 Aug 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
The Board then stated:[4] In summary, the board finds that claim 1 of both requests relates to the technical implementation of excluded matter in the form of game rules. [read post]
26 Jun 2010, 11:01 am by Oliver G. Randl
This failure amounts to a substantial procedural violation requiring that the decision under appeal to be set aside and the case be remitted to the first instance (see T 278/00). [read post]