No grāmatas satura
1.3. rezultāts no 27.
18. lappuse
limitations are expressed , -as those words are used in the art involved.1 Ordinarily a count which is not ambiguous is interpreted as broadly as its language will permit . The interpretation must be reasonable , however , and may not ...
limitations are expressed , -as those words are used in the art involved.1 Ordinarily a count which is not ambiguous is interpreted as broadly as its language will permit . The interpretation must be reasonable , however , and may not ...
19. lappuse
2 A count if ambiguous , will be interpreted in the light of the application in which it originated . ' A count will not be imerpreted so broadly as to depart from the construction which was given it when it was allowed over the prior ...
2 A count if ambiguous , will be interpreted in the light of the application in which it originated . ' A count will not be imerpreted so broadly as to depart from the construction which was given it when it was allowed over the prior ...
92. lappuse
It appeared that if the quoted phrase were interpreted to mean movement longitudinally of the axis of the car ... It would seem that the same rule should apply where broad interpretation would render the claim unpatentable as describing ...
It appeared that if the quoted phrase were interpreted to mean movement longitudinally of the axis of the car ... It would seem that the same rule should apply where broad interpretation would render the claim unpatentable as describing ...
Lietotāju komentāri - Rakstīt atsauksmi
Ierastajās vietās neesam atraduši nevienu atsauksmi.
Saturs
PAGE | iii |
Introduction | lvi |
The principal steps in an interference proceeding | 4 |
Autortiesības | |
4 citas sadaļas nav parādītas.
Citi izdevumi - Skatīt visu
Bieži izmantoti vārdi un frāzes
52 CCPA abandonment action affidavits amendment appeal application assignee Attorneys award Board Brenner burden CADC claims Com'r Pats Commissioner of Patents Company considered copy Corp Corporation Court Court of Customs Customs and Patent decision determination direct disclosure dissolve distinguished effect entitled establish evidence F.Supp fact failure ference filing date final hearing ground held infra inter interference interpretation inventor involving JPOS judgment Junior jurisdiction limitations Manual means motion notice old Rule operation original panels Patent Appeals Patent Office petition preliminary statement present primary examiner prior priority of invention procedure proceedings proof proposed Count Public question reasons record reduction to practice reference refusal relation Request requisites res adjudicata respect senior party specification steps subject matter Supp supra taking Term testimony tion United USPQ