Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
2200, Citation of Prior Art and Ex Parte Reexamination of Patents; 2300, Interference Proceedings; 2400, Biotechnology; 2500, Maintenance Fees; 2600, Optional Inter Partes Reexamination; 2700, Patent Terms and Extensions; 2800, Supplemental Examination; 2900, International Design Applications; Appendix I, Partial List of Trademarks'
In law, ex parte (/ ɛ k s ˈ p ɑːr t eɪ,-iː /) is a Latin term meaning literally "from/out of the party/faction [1] of" (name of party/faction, often omitted), thus signifying "on behalf of (name)". An ex parte decision is one decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties to the dispute to be present.
Ex parte reexaminations are initiated by members of the public, but once said members submit their request, they no longer actively participate in the proceedings. The correspondence is strictly between the examiner and the patent owner. The fee for filing a request for an ex parte reexamination is $6,000 as of January 16, 2018. [7]
Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333 (1866), is an important case involving the disbarment of former Confederate officials. The Supreme Court ruled that a statute prohibiting former Confederate government officials from serving in the US government was unconstitutional as being both a bill of attainder and an ex post facto law.
Ex parte Jackson, 96 U.S. 727 (1878), was a United States Supreme Court ex parte decision. [1] The case decided that the United States Post Office may open and inspect mail to limit the transmission of circulars on lotteries . [ 2 ]
Ex parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 1935 C.D. 11; 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935) is a United States patent law decision. When a patent application is in condition for allowance, prosecution on the merits is closed. At this time, further amendments of the patent application are allowed only to correct formal objections, which typically include minor ...
The "SAD” acronym was coined by Prof. Eric Goldman of Santa Clara University School of Law to refer to “the Schedule A Defendants scheme.” [4] [7] The acronym reflects the fact that rightsowners deploying the scheme often list the defendants in a “Schedule A” to the complaint rather than the more typical approach of enumerating defendants in the case caption. [10]
Ex Parte Hennen, 38 U.S. 225 (1839), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court concerning the removal power under the Appointments Clause. References [ edit ]