Search for: "Matter of G. C. ," Results 1261 - 1280 of 4,011
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jan 2016, 5:35 pm by Kent Scheidegger
(g) The age of the defendant at the time of the crime. [read post]
27 Mar 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
As a matter of fact, in decision G 1/95 [5.3] the EBA has declared that when opinion G 10/91 used the term “fresh ground for opposition” it intended to refer to a ground for opposition “which was neither raised and substantiated in the notice of opposition, nor introduced into the proceedings by the OD in application of A 114(1) and in accordance with the principles set out in G 10/91 [16]”.NB: Why do the Boards so often cite G… [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 5:57 am by Joel R. Brandes
Nonetheless, Supreme Court's reduction to $30 weekly was excessive and, it found $150 per week to be "just and appropriate" under the circumstances present here (Domestic Relations Law §240[1-b][g]  ). [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 9:42 am by McNabb Associates, P.C.
No. 194798/21722 (Panama); RUC # 2172202194798 (Panama) [SDNT] ESCALONA, Victor Julio, c/o C A V J CORPORATION LTDA., Bogota, Colombia; c/o C.A. [read post]
23 Jun 2020, 6:30 am by Jacquelyn Greene
Matters that begin in juvenile court and allege any Class A – Class G felony committed at age 16 or 17 must be transferred for prosecution in the criminal system following a finding of probable cause or the return of an indictment related to the Class A – Class G felony offense. [read post]
22 Feb 2017, 1:13 pm by Sandy Levinson
  All of the others are more disturbing Most telling, of course, is (g), which seems to give unfettered discretion to an extraordinarily low-visibility bureaucrat to destroy a person's life. [read post]
27 Feb 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
In application of decision G 7/95 [7.2], the Board had to decide the question whether D1 is disclosing or not all the features of claim 1 as a question of inventive step, since the [patent proprietor] did not give its consent to the introduction of the ground of lack of novelty, raised by the [opponent] for the first time on appeal. [read post]
11 Jan 2021, 2:16 am by Rose Hughes
This is the so-called "free evaluation of evidence" principle (G 3/97) (Case Law of the Board of Appeal, G 4.1). [read post]
26 Aug 2019, 12:09 pm
: G 1/18, the decision | Coloplast v Salts: Should UK infringement proceedings be stayed if the patent has been opposed? [read post]
22 Jul 2013, 3:51 am
The EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeal has decided that the provisions of TRIPS do not apply to the EPO as it is not a party to the Agreement (see G 2/02 and G 3/02, regarding the claiming of priority). [read post]