Chemical Patentability and the ChemistUniversity of Wisconsin, 1978 - 312 lappuses |
No grāmatas satura
1.–3. rezultāts no 16.
24. lappuse
... noted that neither Sears nor Compco were trade secret cases . They both considered invalid design patents , and both concluded that once federal protection of the designs had been lost , the designs entered the public domain , and could ...
... noted that neither Sears nor Compco were trade secret cases . They both considered invalid design patents , and both concluded that once federal protection of the designs had been lost , the designs entered the public domain , and could ...
36. lappuse
... noted by KINTNER & LAHR , supra n . 2 , at 123 , " [ t ] he scope of legal protection afforded an idea is dependent upon the nature of the idea and its value both to its author and the corporation to which it is submitted . It also ...
... noted by KINTNER & LAHR , supra n . 2 , at 123 , " [ t ] he scope of legal protection afforded an idea is dependent upon the nature of the idea and its value both to its author and the corporation to which it is submitted . It also ...
65. lappuse
... noted that of the three requirements for paten- tability " utility " is the only requirement that is not defined , at least by negative implication within the patent statute . " Historically , utility was judicially interpreted to mean ...
... noted that of the three requirements for paten- tability " utility " is the only requirement that is not defined , at least by negative implication within the patent statute . " Historically , utility was judicially interpreted to mean ...
Saturs
A COMPARISON OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES | 11 |
continued | 28 |
THE PATENTING PROCESS | 37 |
Autortiesības | |
7 citas sadaļas nav parādītas.
Bieži izmantoti vārdi un frāzes
acids action addition analysis anticipated Appeals atoms authority basis Brenner bromine carbon carboxylic chapter chemical cited claims Class composition compounds Congress considered Constitution container Corp decision described determined develop device differences disclosed disclosure discussed effect elements examiner example existence federal filed follows Graham grant held hinge hydrogen bromide idea infringement intellectual property interference invalid invention inventor involved issue known language later least limited manufacture material means metal method necessary noted novelty obtained obviousness overcap patent application patent law Patent Office percent person plate practice Preparation prior art protection provides reaction reference rejection result seal shank similar skill specific sprayer statute statutory structure subject matter suit supra Supreme Court tion TORTS trade secret Trademark United utility validity vinylic