Search for: "MATTER OF B T B"
Results 1601 - 1620
of 20,068
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jun 2013, 10:35 am
Nilima Mandal (2008) was cited to show that in absence of pleadings, no evidence can be considered.The IPAB however held that S 25(2)(e) had been raised by the respondent, and Section 25(2)(e) is a ground for revocation if that the invention so far as claimed in any claim of the complete specification is obvious and clearly does not involve any inventive step, having regard to the matter published as mentioned in clause (b) or having regard to what was used in India before the… [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 4:24 pm
” Whether someone’s photographing what you do in public shouldn’t matter, he said: “It’s about not doing that to begin with. [read post]
8 Sep 2009, 10:34 pm
Shouldn't we strive to make Principle VI actually mean something? [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 4:40 am
T. [read post]
13 Jan 2015, 2:23 pm
Posted By: Robert B. [read post]
19 Nov 2014, 6:40 am
’ Fed.R.App.P. 46(b)(1)(B). [read post]
26 Aug 2024, 4:15 am
Isn’t she sufficiently reliable to establish that the fact of a murder committed by these two cops happened? [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 4:59 pm
What matters is what the TMEP says the court said, which isn’t always the same as what the court said; sometimes says “the court can’t have meant that. [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 6:00 am
“They are facing issues such as regulatory matters, data security and privacy concerns,” Fitzpatrick said. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 11:00 pm
Well, most importantly: (a) It helped catapult Nigeria’s GDP overnight under his administration; and (b) It has received the most attention and support(albeit with criticism) under his administration. [read post]
23 Mar 2014, 12:48 pm
§ 11607(b)(3); and, in part, because Ms. [read post]
16 Jan 2018, 3:36 am
[see cited cases].To be clear, Trademark Rules 2.106(b)(3)(i) and 2.114(b)(3)(i) do not require that, after a defendant’s initial answer, amendment to add an omitted compulsory counterclaim must be denied where the movant has not demonstrated that the counterclaim is based on newly-acquired evidence.* * * * * * * * The rules require compulsory counterclaims to be pleaded in the answer, if known, but under Fed. [read post]
7 May 2013, 2:11 pm
But “good cause” is required to be shown under Rule 26(b)(1) only if seeking broad discovery of “matter[s] relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. [read post]
8 Nov 2022, 3:04 pm
I think this is correct as a matter of current law. [read post]
6 Sep 2008, 5:45 pm
Either way, Ed has some explaining to do.)Actually, I don't think it has anything to do with Ed's favorite hobby horse-- the great bogeyman of liberal "judicial activism," or any of mine for that matter. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 7:17 am
In her spare time, she publishes "Rebecca Tushnet's 43(b)log. [read post]
30 Jan 2015, 6:02 am
Moreover, the Lanham Act claim was sufficiently alleged to satisfy Rule 9(b). [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 7:59 am
(I’m surprised that POSCO didn’t move to kick most or all of these out as puffery as a matter of law.) [read post]
18 Dec 2012, 9:58 am
Or, where a plaintiff (or a defendant, for that matter) loses the product in question, (e)(2)(B) should allow the court to bar any pre-loss expert report without a showing of bad faith. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 8:37 am
The panel hadn't reached either issue because it ruled that the case didn't qualify for class treatment. [read post]
