Search for: "Matter of Diamond B."
Results 1 - 20
of 280
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Mar 2022, 4:12 am
"To the contrary, it appears immediately above and summarizes the other descriptive matter appearing below it. [read post]
22 Dec 2009, 3:25 pm
The Montana Supreme Court has issued an Opinion in the following matter: DA 09-0013, 2009 MT 434, JOHN TALMAGE, d/b/a MONTANA DIAMOND AIRE, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 4:55 pm
However, this incident obviously is no laughing matter. [read post]
3 Oct 2007, 6:56 am
§ 10-1-761(2)(B)(ii)(III). [read post]
18 May 2012, 5:41 am
” p. 37 (citing Diamond v. [read post]
26 Jan 2017, 5:00 am
In Section 7.B.(1)(B) under the heading, “Service Providers” and the subheading “Auditors. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 8:37 am
A panel of our Court held that the District Court‘s ruling was inconsistent with the predominance inquiry mandated by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3), and remanded the matter for further proceedings. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 3:15 pm
Claims drafting gamesmanship and looking at the claim as a whole will always raise issues though (that pesky Diamond v. [read post]
21 Oct 2013, 4:29 pm
A company that you know has issued 800 billion -- that's "billion" with a "b" -- shares. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 11:09 am
That, however, assumes that the matter gets to the jury. [read post]
22 Sep 2011, 10:42 am
Or, since it is all third class and catalogues, will it matter? [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 8:47 am
An amicus curiae, literally meaning “friend of the court,” is someone who is not a party to the case, but has strong views on the particular matter and wishes to provide information to the court to assist them in making their decision. [read post]
21 Aug 2007, 2:43 pm
11 U.S.C. 1123(b)(2). [read post]
21 Aug 2007, 2:43 pm
11 U.S.C. 1123(b)(2). [read post]
6 Jun 2012, 11:48 am
It therefore concluded at 39: The present board therefore takes the view that, if it only had to consider the exclusion of plant varieties in Article 53(b) EPC, the subject matter of the claims [] would not be excluded from patentability. [read post]
17 Mar 2015, 7:16 pm
G’s will devised to his son, A, “that diamond ring I inherited from grandfather” and devised to his daughter, B, “that diamond brooch I inherited from grandmother. [read post]
23 Dec 2014, 12:05 pm
If the examiner determines that the claimed subject matter is directed towards a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea, naturally occurring phenomenon, or law of nature), than the analysis proceeds to part B of the test. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 4:06 am
Rule 208(b)(1)(B), SCACR. [read post]
1 Mar 2023, 6:09 am
Now framed as a question of indefiniteness under of § 112 under the 1952 Act, (now § 112(b)), the court found the claim invalid because it defined “what that concentrate will do rather than what it is. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 12:29 pm
In short order, on October 23, 1996, Judge Weinstein issued a short, published opinion, in which he ducked the pending Rule 702 motions, and he granted partial summary judgment on the claims of systemic disease.[10] Only the lawyers involved in the matters would have known that there was no pending motion for summary judgment! [read post]
