Search for: "Chance v. Board of Examiners"
Results 41 - 60
of 481
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jun 2016, 12:02 pm
This post examines an opinion from the Ohio Supreme Court: Disciplinary Counsel v. [read post]
2 Oct 2015, 9:01 am
Blog: Temas de propiedad intelectual Víctor M. [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 9:00 am
Hemminger v. [read post]
2 Dec 2009, 8:16 pm
When presented with such arguments, the Board often cites to Winner Int’l Royalty Corp. v. [read post]
11 Sep 2018, 4:29 pm
No chance. [read post]
5 Jan 2010, 5:00 am
City of Westland v. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 9:59 am
But I'm not on board for (c)(4). [read post]
20 Jan 2018, 4:00 am
One way forward for universities after Access Copyright v. [read post]
11 Mar 2015, 6:45 pm
” Al-Harbi v. [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 2:31 pm
A PTO memo issued to Examiners immediately after Bilski v. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 5:21 am
A Circuit panel with a clear focus on this standard is highly unlikely to overturn such a finding, so prosecutors should treat the Board as their only chance. [read post]
23 Sep 2022, 4:14 am
" The Board noted that, when a specific day is not given, the USPTO, for examination purposes, presumes that the first use date is the last day of the month stated. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 11:37 am
In Perry, the Court was urged to rule that across-the-board procedural changes should be made in all criminal cases to guard against the chance of eyewitness misidentification. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 9:01 am
” ———————————- This morning’s decision in New Process Steel v. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 11:11 pm
In Circuit Check Inc. v. [read post]
1 May 2023, 2:39 pm
National Board of Medical Examiners, a summary order issued on May 1. [read post]
22 Apr 2009, 3:45 am
" Zanella Ltd. v. [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 9:39 am
Board disagreed. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 10:22 am
But if you go that route on appeal, you risk the Board ignoring your arguments because "[a]rgument of counsel cannot take the place of evidence lacking in the record" (Meitzner v. [read post]
17 Mar 2021, 7:08 am
By communication dated 18 May 2020 the Board informed the parties that the oral proceedings had been rescheduled for 8 February 2021.V. [read post]
