Search for: "A. T." Results 1201 - 1220 of 881,534
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Oct 2023, 4:00 am by John Oelke
The post R-E-S-P-E-C-T Find Out What It Means To…Your Estate Plan appeared first on German Law. [read post]
20 Oct 2020, 6:47 am by Sander van Rijnswou
The Board holds that such special reasons are apparent in the present case.The provision of Article 11 RPBA 2020 has indeed to be read in conjunction with Article 12(2) RPBA 2020, which provides that it is the primary object of the appeal proceedings to review the decision under appeal in a judicial manner (see also T 1966/16, point 2.2 of the reasons, T 0547/14 points 7.1 and 7.2, and T 0275/15 point 4.). [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
.% of o-phthalic acid (a 1,2-dicarboxylic acid) is not excluded by the open formulation of Claim 1 of the main request.[6.5] Therefore, embodiments that were not encompassed by Claim 1 as granted are in fact encompassed by Claim 1 of the main request, so that the protection conferred has been extended, contrary to A 123(3).[6.6] Consequently, the main request is not allowable.Alleged divergence between two decisions of the Boards of AppealRequest of a referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal… [read post]
15 Sep 2011, 5:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
The competent BoA in cases T 472/88 [2] as well as T 326/02 [6.1-5] and T 381/02 [2] come to the same conclusion as decision T 301/87.These relevant decisions of the BoA distinguish between factual amendments, which are to be examined in view of compliance with the requirements of the EPC pursuant to A 102(3) EPC 1973, and between merely formal, syntactical claim amendments, which do not give rise to a new objection outside A 100.[2.4] The Board adopts this view… [read post]
4 Sep 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
The Board in T 654/10 evidently considered them to be so in that case. [read post]
31 May 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
This conclusion was reached not only where the appeal was directed against the rejection of the opposition by the first instance (see T 329/88; T 165/95; T 749/01; T 436/02 and T 289/06), but also where the appeal was directed against an interlocutory decision according to which the opposed patent could be maintained in amended form (see T 762/89 and T 714/93). [read post]
6 Nov 2013, 2:34 am by Matrix Legal  Information Team
On appeal from: [2012] EWCA Civ 1714 This matter concerned a challenge to the validity of the Court of Appeal’s decision to stay proceedings in different jurisdictions relating to insurance and damages claims in the aftermath of the sinking of the Alexandros T. [read post]
25 Nov 2011, 1:45 am by JA Hodnicki
Daniel Sokol Could it be that AT&T and T-Mobile are ready to end the merger even before the antitrust trial set for February? [read post]
6 Nov 2009, 10:36 am by jblock
Original source:  http://ca.sys-con.com/node/1170835 King & Spalding announced the appointment of Timothy T. [read post]
3 Nov 2021, 7:54 pm by Bridget Crawford
William & Mary Law School seeks applications from distinguished scholars for the Joseph T. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 4:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
A computer program comprising computer program code means adapted to perform all the steps of claims 1 to 4 when the program is run on a computer. [4.1] The opinion of the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) in case G 3/08 [headnotes 6 and 7] found inter alia that there was no divergence between decisions T 424/03 and T 1173/97 which would make the referral to the EBA. [read post]
12 May 2012, 11:01 am by Oliver
The Board found this claim to be novel and found the objective technical problem to consist in the provision of improved means and methods for the detection of Campylobacter.It then went on to say:[21] Based on its definition of the technical problem as the provision of an alternative method for detecting Campylobacter, and referring to the Case Law (T 631/06, T 879/05, T 931/04, and T 12/07) the respondent argued that the correct approach in the assessment of… [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
This decision deals with the revocation of a patent - owned by XIRING - by the Opposition Division (OD) and the subsequent appeal, filed on behalf of Gemalto SA (hereinafter referred to as “alleged appellant”). [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
T 867/05 relates to a change from “a membrane material for use in dialysis ... [read post]
2 Jun 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
The circumstances of the case in decision T 1210/05 are therefore different from, and not comparable with those of the present case.The [patent proprietor] has also made reference to the comments of decision T 1210/05 [2.5.8] relating to the capacity of a witness to recollect past events. [read post]