Search for: "FOOTE v. STATE" Results 101 - 120 of 3,884
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jan 2024, 4:31 pm
The price is too high.Now, in this particular case, I agree that the failure to provide post-seizure notice in the particular manner required by state law doesn't require suppression or invalidation of the conviction. [read post]
21 Jan 2024, 2:49 am by Rose Hughes
 Amending the description and claim-like clausesThe EPO Guidelines for Examination currently require that, when adapting the description, an applicant must either delete subject matter not covered by the claims or explicitly state in the description that such subject matter is not part of the invention (F-IV, 4.3). [read post]
14 Jan 2024, 7:39 am by Rose Hughes
Regardless of the approach eventually settled on by the UPC, the decision in K-fee v Nespresso is a reminder for constant vigilance in European prosecution if patentees are to avoid shooting themselves in the foot with respect to their US patent strategy. [read post]
8 Jan 2024, 7:48 am by Eric Goldman
The only difference here is that, instead of Peninsula’s search results directly stating the name Peninsula, they include the part name. [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 9:11 am by Tobin Admin
Judge Miller said that the Court of Appeals has noted that “a properly filed renewal action stands on the same footing as the original action with respect to statutes of limitation. [read post]