Outline of Patent Office Interference PracticeUnited States Law Printing Office, 1966 |
No grāmatas satura
1.–3. rezultāts no 39.
61. lappuse
... testimony in chief , and in which the other party shall complete the testimony on his side , and a further time in which the junior party may take rebutting testimony , but he shall take no other testimony . If there be more than two ...
... testimony in chief , and in which the other party shall complete the testimony on his side , and a further time in which the junior party may take rebutting testimony , but he shall take no other testimony . If there be more than two ...
64. lappuse
An applicant cannot establish the requisite facts by his testimony alone.1 And his notes of themselves do not suffice . Credible oral testimony of other persons will do . But it must be factually specific.3 addressed mail see Pezzillo v ...
An applicant cannot establish the requisite facts by his testimony alone.1 And his notes of themselves do not suffice . Credible oral testimony of other persons will do . But it must be factually specific.3 addressed mail see Pezzillo v ...
77. lappuse
... testimony after filing of it in the Patent Office is provided by Rule 279 . Rules 282 and 2832 provide for use in evidence of official records and printed publications and testimony taken in another interference or action . Rule 2843 ...
... testimony after filing of it in the Patent Office is provided by Rule 279 . Rules 282 and 2832 provide for use in evidence of official records and printed publications and testimony taken in another interference or action . Rule 2843 ...
Saturs
Introduction | xlvii |
The principal steps in an interference proceeding | 4 |
Interference Issue Interpretation of Counts | 17 |
Autortiesības | |
4 citas sadaļas nav parādītas.
Citi izdevumi - Skatīt visu
Bieži izmantoti vārdi un frāzes
36 CCPA 49 CCPA 50 CCPA 75 USPQ 99 USPQ Action under 35 adversary adversary's affidavits amendment Attorneys award of priority Board erred Board of Interference Board of Patent Botnen burden of proof CADC Com'r Pats Commissioner of Patents Commonwealth Engineering Corp Corporation Court of Customs Customs and Patent decision declaration of interference disclosure double patenting effect estoppel evidence F 2d ference filing date infra inter interference counts Interference Examiners interference issue interference proceeding inventor inventorship involving judgment Junior Party jurisdiction L.Ed Ladd Manual motion to dissolve motion under Rule notice old Rule panels Patent Appeals Patent Interferences Patent Office pending petition preliminary statement primary examiner prior art priority of invention proposed Count question reasons of appeal record reduction to practice Requisites res adjudicata Rule 94 senior specification Sperry Rand subject matter Supp supra tion