Search for: "Doe Nos."
Results 1961 - 1980
of 2,061
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 May 2013, 4:23 am
Because practice makes permanent, and only by practicing perfectly does it become perfect. [read post]
29 Dec 2022, 10:01 am
First, the Ninth Circuit concluded that four of the alleged anticompetitive behaviors (Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 6 above) fail “short of alleging anticompetitive conduct in the online search advertising market. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 9:00 am
What Does the Literature Tell Us? [read post]
9 May 2022, 7:29 am
In this respect, it does not seem out of the question to consider the motivation of the whistleblower when assessing the “sufficient reason”. [read post]
20 Sep 2011, 4:27 am
But the Company Law Board has held that the main company petition under section 397 of the Act is not demurable or objectionable in the absence of subsidiary companies and their directors and share holders and in approprate case, they would come under the expression affairs of the company meaning the affairs of the holding company" Further, it was also held that "Therefore, when a person is not a member of a company, his alleging oppression and invoking the provisions of section 397… [read post]
9 Apr 2009, 2:46 pm
In rejecting the claims as invalid, the Board concluded that appellants were not entitled to their genus claim of DNA molecules encoding proteins 80% identical to SEQ ID NO:2: Without a correlation between structure and function, the claim does little more than define the claimed invention by function. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 6:00 am
Tax Court, Nos. 2685-11, 8393-12, Sept. 17, 2014) online: <http://goo.gl/NiY7XY> (click “available here” at bottom of the page). [read post]
16 Aug 2018, 6:15 pm
Ct. nos. 2088 EDA 2016 and 2187 EDA 2016). [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 8:03 am
Whirlpool has now replied by requesting reexamination of those patents (see inter partes Request Nos. (4), (5) & (6)). [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 8:03 am
Whirlpool has now replied by requesting reexamination of those patents (see inter partes Request Nos. (4), (5) & (6)). [read post]
24 Apr 2016, 7:00 am
For example, we have seen the Supreme Court reject eligibility arguments that merely contend that the claim in fact recites some physical structure, and so does not completely preempt the underlying abstract idea or natural phenomenon itself (putting aside for the moment what that structure is). [read post]
10 Dec 2011, 10:37 pm
The appellant has questioned the choice of the audit firm also, on the ground that the said firm does audit work for several companies belonging to different branches of the Birla Group, being the industrial house having presence in several areas in the corporate sector of this country. [read post]
4 Feb 2011, 3:15 pm
Patent Nos. 5,597,767 (the ‘767 patent), 5,694,740 (the ‘740 patent), and/or 5,512,374 (the ‘374 patent). [read post]
21 Jun 2012, 10:40 am
., Nos. 04 Civ. 9866(LTS)(JLC), 05 md 1688(LTS) (S.D.N.Y.) [read post]
22 Feb 2024, 9:27 pm
See also, eg, Supreme Court, Appeals Nos. 154 and 165/2017 of 20 May 2017 [tacit submission to the jurisdiction of Bahraini courts]). [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 1:33 am
I would like give an example in this regard as follows:Example:The property registration departments in any state required to maintain the details of properties like Survey Nos etc. and when approached, these officials are required to provide the details of encumbrance over any property. [read post]
15 May 2009, 3:31 pm
It may be that the TTAB continues to find reasons (a.k.a. loopholes) why Medinol simply does not apply and therefore that cancellation is not required in a particular case - as it did in the Zanella case.BACKGROUND ON MEDINOL JURISPRUDENCEIn 2003, the TTAB issued a precedential opinion clarifying the requirement that a trademark must be used, and continue to be used, in connection with all of the goods or services at issue. [read post]
13 Apr 2021, 2:30 am
Under German insolvency law, the debtor does not lose its legal capacity even if it loses the power to administer and dispose of the insolvency estate (see Schulte, Patentgesetz mit EPÜ, 10th edition, Introduction, paragraph 217).3.3 For the reasons stated above, the board had no reason to interrupt t [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 5:09 am
See Orders at docket nos. 197, 223, 225, 251, 256 and 258. [read post]
24 Dec 2022, 8:10 am
December 14, 2022Pendente lite child support award will not be disturbed absent exigent circumstances or failure to consider appropriate factors. [read post]
