Search for: "Does 1-96"
Results 121 - 140
of 2,138
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2024, 2:10 pm
Based on what we know, what does it say about political engagement? [read post]
19 Mar 2024, 2:10 pm
Based on what we know, what does it say about political engagement? [read post]
15 May 2013, 9:33 am
’”) Accordingly, we sustain the rejection of claims 1-67, 69-89, and 91-96 as unpatentable over Kuechler and Miller.Even when ExxonMobil won on a point, the bigger battle was still lost:Although Patent Owner persuades us that the stated rationale forcombining Mulvaney and Kuechler is insufficient, it has failed to persuadeus that the claims are patentable over Mulvaney and Jorgensen. [read post]
19 May 2011, 6:26 pm
” Restatement, § 96 (1)(a) (emphasis added). [read post]
29 Nov 2021, 9:22 am
In this earlier blog post, I discussed changes made to North Carolina’s first appearance process, to be effective for criminal processes served on or after December 1, 2021. [read post]
15 Feb 2015, 9:18 am
Canada (Attorney General), 2015 SCC 1 (34948) The current RCMP labour relations regime denies a meaningful process of collective bargaining, and imposes a scheme that does not permit them to identify and advance their workplace concerns free from management’s influence. [read post]
3 Aug 2015, 5:58 pm
Nor does it mean the insurance companies are always deliberately engaged in wrongful denials. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 7:17 am
Banker, July 10, 2007, at 1). [read post]
12 Sep 2010, 6:28 am
What does this mean? [read post]
12 Sep 2018, 1:17 am
2) If the answer to 1) is negative, is Article 96 of the Plant Variety Regulation to be interpreted in such way that prescription only applies to those specific acts of infringement carried out prior to the three-year period, but not to those acts carried out within the last three years before the action? [read post]
27 Aug 2013, 5:01 pm
Because of this lack of legal security claim 1 does not comply with the requirement of clarity pursuant to A 84. [read post]
17 Dec 2011, 1:01 pm
’Today the Advocate General proposed the following answers: "(1) A database can be protected by copyright, for the purposes of Article 3 of Directive 96/9 ... only if it is an original intellectual creation of its author. [read post]
12 Jan 2023, 7:03 am
"Does Plaintiff have a case? [read post]
26 Aug 2022, 2:25 am
Sections 1, 2, 3, and 45 of the Trademark Act provide the statutory basis for a refusal to register subject matter that fails to function as a service mark. [read post]
18 Jan 2010, 1:45 pm
The 9th Circuit (2-1) reversed. [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 6:00 am
LeBrock (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 1137, 1139 [117 Cal.Rptr.2d 790].) [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 1:03 pm
Ross, Suchoff, Egert, Hankin, Maidenbaum & Mazel, P.C., No. 96 CIV. 1756 (LAP), 1997 WL 171011, *6 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
28 May 2019, 3:45 am
Does the finding that (a disclosure in) a prior art document D1 does not qualify as an accidental anticipation (thus not allowing the use of an undisclosed disclaimer) because it does not fulfill the criterion laid down in G 1/03 that it is so unrelated to and remote from the claimed invention that the skilled person would never have taken it into consideration when making the invention, imply that it is automatically relevant for inventive step? [read post]
22 Jun 2012, 3:17 pm
Specifically, a CPO could file an exemption under Regulations 4.7, 4.12 or CFTC Advisory Rule 18-96. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 1:47 pm
The opinion notes that § 1114(1)(a) and § 1125(a)(1) of the Lanham Act are not extraterritorial and extend only to claims where the infringing use in commerce is domestic. [read post]
