Search for: "MATTER OF K A B"
Results 1721 - 1740
of 2,720
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jun 2012, 3:52 am
On 15 September 2010, the CCI formed a prima facie opinion on the contravention of the Competition Act, 2002 (the Competition Act) and directed investigations in the matter. [read post]
22 Jun 2012, 3:22 pm
§203(k)]. [read post]
21 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm
The opponent argued that in a claim directed to a composition of matter and drafted with an open wording of the type “composition comprising ... [read post]
20 Jun 2012, 10:00 pm
See also K. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm
“particularly relevant”) for all claims, even to expect – that the claimed subject-matter could be directed to such a particular embodiment or development after an amendment, so that the search should have encompassed subject-matter amended accordingly.It follows that – in the Board’s opinion – the subject-matter of the amended claim has to be considered to have been searched within the meaning of R 137(5), even if the feature added to… [read post]
16 Jun 2012, 5:00 pm
Type b and press Enter: b ? [read post]
14 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm
The subject-matter of claim 1 is seen as consistent only in particular situations. [read post]
13 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm
If any reader can shed some light on this matter, please do so.To download the whole decision, click here.The file wrapper can be found here. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm
The disclaimer of claim 1 (“non-human”) excludes human beings in order to satisfy A 53(a) while the disclaimers of claims 11 and 14 exclude subject-matter which is not patentable under A 53(b) taken in combination with R 28, paragraphs b) and c). [4] The three disclaimers which exclude subject-matter not eligible for patent protection and only serve the purpose of removing specific legal obstacles do not contribute to the invention. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 1:00 pm
Thus, there may be a few public entities that only offer 401(k) type plans. [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm
As a consequence, the subject-matter of claim 4 is to be considered novel within the meaning of A 54.To download the whole decision (in German), click here.The file wrapper can be found here. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 5:41 pm
[This is what is meant in subsection b above.] [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm
Nevertheless, [the opponent] is of the opinion that the remaining product claims are still directed to subject-matter excluded from patentability by A 53(b). [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 8:35 am
DIMENGO AND RICHARD B. [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 9:05 am
Commenters didn’t seem to object to renewal of the exemption but claim there’s some kind of misuse, b/c lower quality alternatives are available. [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 1:00 am
If a matter was not commenced on the Estates List, yet falls into one of the categories mentioned above, the matter can be transferred to the Estates List on consent, or on a motion, to either a judge who is hearing the matter (but not sitting on the Estates List), or a judge sitting to hear matters on the Estates List. [read post]
3 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm
Novelty[3] Since it was not contested by the [patent proprietor] that the washing machine with model number WD-R100C constituting the established public prior use, as exemplified in Appendix B, comprises all features of claim 1 of the patent in suit and since the Board finds no reason to conclude otherwise, the subject-matter of claim 1 lacks novelty (A 54(1)) and the [patent proprietor’s] main request is therefore not allowable. [read post]
31 May 2012, 6:09 am
by Jacqueline K. [read post]
31 May 2012, 1:30 am
The Court disagreed, stating: [B]iological grandparents are not entitled to notice of adoption proceedings concerning a grandchild, and are not entitled to intervene as a matter of right in those proceedings. . . . [read post]
30 May 2012, 10:05 am
B. [read post]
