Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Five Superior Courts—in Orange, Sacramento, San Diego, San Joaquin, and Ventura Counties—use CCMS version 3 to process civil cases. This represents approximately 25 percent of the civil case volume in California. [3] Fresno is the only Superior Court still using version 2 of CCMS.
The California Courts of Appeal are the state intermediate appellate courts in the U.S. state of California. The state is geographically divided along county lines into six appellate districts. [1] The Courts of Appeal form the largest state-level intermediate appellate court system in the United States, with 106 justices.
Claim construction under the EPC; use of the description and drawings under Article 69(1), second sentence, EPC and the Protocol on the Interpretation of Article 69 EPC to interpret the claims when assessing the patentability of an invention under Articles 52 to 57 EPC. In the case at hand, the Opposition Division had found that a term in the ...
The referral relating the patentability of programs for computers was dismissed as inadmissible by the Enlarged Board of Appeal. The Enlarged Board considered that there was only a development in the case law, rather than a divergence in decisions given by the Boards of Appeal on the question of patentability of computer-implemented inventions ...
New Rule 36(1)(a) introduced a time limit for voluntary division of the parent application, while Rule 36(1)(b) provides a time limit for mandatory division of the parent application in case of a lack of unity under Article 82 EPC. [15] "Mandatory" in that sense means that, to cover each of the non-unitary inventions (i.e. the inventions that ...
Many of California's larger superior courts have specialized divisions for different types of cases like criminal, civil, traffic, small claims, probate, family, juvenile, and complex litigation, but these divisions are simply administrative assignments that can be rearranged at the discretion of each superior court's presiding judge in ...
R 7/09 [5] was a petition for review of T 27/07 [6] and is the very first case in which a petition for review was successful since the institution of the procedure. In that case, the Enlarged Board of Appeal held that a violation of the right to be heard (a right guaranteed by Article 113(1) EPC) occurred during the underlying appeal proceedings, because the Board of Appeal apparently failed ...
EPO headquarters in Munich, Germany, where the Boards of Appeal were based until 2017.. Decisions of the first instance departments of the European Patent Office (EPO) can be appealed, i.e. challenged, before the Boards of Appeal of the EPO, in a judicial procedure (proper to an administrative court), as opposed to an administrative procedure. [1]