Search for: "A. T." Results 1141 - 1160 of 881,534
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Apr 2012, 11:01 am by Oliver
As [the amendment] only corresponds to a syntactical redrafting of the claims, which does not lead to any substantial modification, there is, according to the established case law of the Boards of appeal, no reason to [raise] any new objection beyond A 100 EPC 1973 (see, for instance, T 367/96 [6.2], T 381/02 [2.3.7], T 1855/07 [2.2-4]). [read post]
6 May 2015, 6:00 am by Daniel Leaderman
Kennedy, CEO and president and chair of the management committee at T. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 6:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
The present board holds that the principles set out in T 1212/97 (affirmed by T 12/01 [20]; T 667/01 [2]) apply to the present case. [5.5] In T 1212/97 [3] the Board did not consider evidence from the lecturer alone as being satisfactory evidence as to what was made available to the public at the lecture. [read post]
12 Jul 2024, 11:45 am
For the second time in three months, AT&T customers have their personal information exposed. [read post]
2 Jun 2010, 3:02 pm by Oliver G. Randl
Hence, the reinstatement of the claims as granted as the Main Request was allowed, in particular because objections under A 123, paragraphs 2 and 3, had been raised against the requests containing amended claims. [11.10] It is apparent from the above that T 528/93 deals with claims being substantially identical, withdrawn before the OD and represented before the Board, whereas T 168/99 concerns a case in which there was no explicit abandonment of the claims as granted and… [read post]
31 Mar 2017, 10:25 am by Tom Smith
Authors of a new paper suggest that T-Rex and other tyrannosaurs had sensitive skin on their noses they used to better explore their surroundings as well as their lovers' bodies, The Guardian reports. [read post]
29 Sep 2009, 6:26 am
Whoopie Goldberg said it, but let me compare my sources:The State of California brought a statutory rape case and Polanski copped a plea bargain.Whoopi Goldberg, who wasn't even there says nope no statutory rape.Hmm, the more credible source is what? [read post]
14 Sep 2010, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
The Opposition Division (OD) considered the case comparable to T 131/01. [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 3:02 pm by Oliver G. Randl
Therefore, the removal of this feature from the independent claim is not subject to the conditions set out in T 331/87. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
On the other hand, T 563/91 [1.2], T 729/90 [1.2] and T 162/97 [1.1.2] are decisions that could support the position of the patent proprietor.However, there are several other decisions that have not been cited by the patent proprietor which establish rather more strict requirements for statements of grounds of appeal. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
The fact that this system operated efficiently for many years was evidence that it was normally satisfactory (see T 30/90, J 31/90, J 32/90, T 309/88). [read post]
2 Nov 2018, 5:22 am by Diane Tweedlie
J 10/11, T 570/07).From the above it follows that the appeal is likely to be rejected as inadmissible. [read post]
15 Nov 2010, 8:28 am by Ed
Translated: I didn’t get my way. [read post]
12 Nov 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
The OD therefore concluded that these declarations did not satisfy the criteria in decision T 1212/97 for establishing the contents of an oral disclosure beyond reasonable doubt. [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
This decision contains interesting paragraphs both on reformatio in peius and disclaimers.On March 11, 2003, the Opposition Division (OD) had maintained the patent in amended form.The opponent filed an appeal.In a first decision (T 724/03) the Board held that the disclaimer allowed by the OD did not contravene A 123. [read post]
17 Mar 2008, 2:18 pm
This posting covers Links on the LawPundit Main Page : (2) (t) The Law Blogroll - T:Golf season is under way so that our postings here are a bit shorter than normal. [read post]