Search for: "DOES I-X"
Results 1741 - 1760
of 7,395
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Sep 2018, 7:17 am
According to this Board, the interpretation of those decisions ignores the fact that Article 114(2) EPC does not justify such discretion, as previous case law has repeatedly stated. [read post]
20 Jun 2024, 12:18 pm
I will turn to that case next week.]What do I think about Issue X, Y, or Z? [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 1:35 pm
I do not accept this submission. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 12:39 am
Some of it goes too far in my opinion and does itself a disservice in coming across as petty (the link saying, ‘if you’re from Firm X click here” which opens a pop up window featuring some charmer flipping you the bird, being a case in point). [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 4:44 pm
How does it differ from a battery? [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 2:06 pm
Brian asked me whether I wanted to flesh out my point further in a guest post. [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 7:45 am
Does this make your more hesitant to rely upon a single provider? [read post]
14 May 2007, 2:55 pm
Does it have to do with the impending Burnside-Couch traffic "couplet" scam? [read post]
20 Oct 2009, 7:42 am
I’m not sure that this is right, and I say this for a number of reasons: (a) it does seem to drive a horse and coaches through both the statutory priority for certain classes of person contained in Pt 6 and, just as importantly, the exclusionary provisions in s.160A, 1996 Act. [read post]
14 Jul 2010, 10:40 am
Another twist to the set-up was that the students were occasionally given a ‘sneak insight’ into their negotiation partner’s typed intentions, for example ‘I think I’ll offer X’. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 9:26 am
Since when is an ABSENCE of teaching NOT X the same as TEACHING X? [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 5:12 am
The investigation goes after the obvious failures of X to live up to the DSA standards. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 5:39 am
If the clinic is considering representing X client, “bad law” is that which would be contrary to that X’s interests. [read post]
15 May 2011, 5:54 am
X-Men, Captain America, Green Lantern. [read post]
15 Jan 2014, 9:28 am
It is a big leap from saying that a journal retains some level of usefulness for X number of years to saying that an embargo shorter than X will lead to cancelled subscriptions, yet I think that is the argument that is being made. [read post]
23 May 2018, 12:34 pm
A forensic search of an electronic device is not like a strip search or an x-ray; it does not require border agents to touch a traveler's body, to expose intimate body parts, or to use any physical force against him. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 9:13 am
We hear that it costs a lot to litigate a capital case, and it does. [read post]
6 Jun 2017, 9:01 pm
As we have noted, the Act does not proscribe D&E. [read post]
10 Nov 2010, 4:01 am
“The statement that a ‘test shows x’ (or even that it ‘proves’ x) merely suggests that the test is reliable; it does not send an ‘unavoidable’ message that it is. [read post]
14 May 2013, 8:05 am
It followed that the Dualit capsule does constitute a means relating to the essential element of claim 1 of the Patent because it (i) does contribute to the implementation of the technical teaching of the invention and (ii) is not of completely subordinate importance. [read post]
