Outline of Patent Office Interference Practice1958 - 141 lappuses |
No grāmatas satura
1.–3. rezultāts no 14.
44. lappuse
... party's application as , for example , on the matter of operativeness or right to make , should not be considered but affidavits relating to the prior art may be considered by analogy to Rule 132 . " If there is considerable doubt as to ...
... party's application as , for example , on the matter of operativeness or right to make , should not be considered but affidavits relating to the prior art may be considered by analogy to Rule 132 . " If there is considerable doubt as to ...
108. lappuse
Benton Baker. not disclosed in the Junior Party's application and the Junior Party has no right to make said claims or any of them . Proposed Count A ( .......... modified ) reads : Claim 2 , as amended and ( Here set forth proposed ...
Benton Baker. not disclosed in the Junior Party's application and the Junior Party has no right to make said claims or any of them . Proposed Count A ( .......... modified ) reads : Claim 2 , as amended and ( Here set forth proposed ...
110. lappuse
... Party . Their meaning is clear when considered in the light of the disclosure of that application . The disclosure of the Junior Party's application is inadequate to support them . That the functional limitations of a claim may not be ...
... Party . Their meaning is clear when considered in the light of the disclosure of that application . The disclosure of the Junior Party's application is inadequate to support them . That the functional limitations of a claim may not be ...
Saturs
Introduction | 1 |
Interference in Case of Common Ownership | 11 |
Attorneys Representation of Parties with | 17 |
Autortiesības | |
2 citas sadaļas nav parādītas.
Citi izdevumi - Skatīt visu
Bieži izmantoti vārdi un frāzes
according action affidavits amend application assignee Attorneys Board burden of proof CCPA claims considered copy Corp Court of Customs Customs and Patent decision defined determination direct disclosed disclosure effect entitled establish et al evidence Examiner of Interferences extended fact failing ference filed filing date final hearing follows function further given granted ground held inter interference counts interference proceeding interpreted involved issue judgment Junior limited Manual means ment motion period motion to dissolve noted notice Objections obtained old Rule operation original panels Party's Patent Appeals Patent Office petition practice preliminary statement present Primary Examiner prior priority of invention Procedure proceedings proposed Count question reads reasons record reduction to practice reference relation request respect result senior party specified steps structure subject matter submitted suggested taken taking testimony tion United USPQ