Zobrazeno 1 - 10
of 22
pro vyhledávání: '"Martin Faehndrich"'
Autor:
Andreas Probst, Robert Thimme, Arthur Schmidt, Martin Goetz, David Albers, Brigitte Schumacher, Alexander Meining, Martin Faehndrich, Torsten Beyna, Horst Neuhaus, Armin Kuellmer, Juliane Behn, Michael Birk, Thomas Frieling, Karel Caca
Publikováno v:
BMJ Open Gastroenterology, Vol 7, Iss 1 (2020)
Objective Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) has shown efficacy and safety in the colorectum. The aim of this analysis was to investigate whether EFTR is cost-effective in comparison with surgical and endoscopic treatment alternatives.Design
Externí odkaz:
https://doaj.org/article/01257bf2d1ba4e7693b758172ed8b437
Autor:
Robert Thimme, Martin Goetz, Martin Faehndrich, David Albers, Thomas Frieling, Helmut Messmann, Michael Birk, Alexander Meining, HJ Richter-Schrag, Brigitte Schumacher, Andreas Probst, Torsten Beyna, Karel Caca, Horst Neuhaus, B. Riecken, Arthur Schmidt
Publikováno v:
Gut. 67:1280-1289
ObjectiveEndoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is a novel treatment of colorectal lesions not amenable to conventional endoscopic resection. The aim of this prospective multicentre study was to assess the efficacy and safety of the full-thicknes
Autor:
Martin Faehndrich, Torsten Beyna, Alexander Meining, Robert Thimme, Horst Neuhaus, David Albers, Arthur Schmidt, Thomas Frieling, Michael Birk, Juliane Behn, Helmut Messmann, Andreas Probst, Armin Kuellmer, Karel Caca, Martin Goetz, Brigitte Schumacher
Publikováno v:
BMJ Open Gastroenterology, Vol 7, Iss 1 (2020)
BMJ Open Gastroenterology
BMJ Open Gastroenterology
ObjectiveEndoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) has shown efficacy and safety in the colorectum. The aim of this analysis was to investigate whether EFTR is cost-effective in comparison with surgical and endoscopic treatment alternatives.DesignRe
Publikováno v:
Unified Patent Protection in Europe: A Commentary
The notification also serves to ensure the exchange of information for any opposition proceedings that might still be pending before the EPO. In the context of administrative and legal cooperation pursuant to Art 131 EPC, the EPO has an obligation to
Externí odkaz:
https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::354d1383dbbad9a67176a4c3cd71903f
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0239
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0239
Publikováno v:
Unified Patent Protection in Europe: A Commentary
Rule 45.1 UPCARoP implements Art 49(6) UPCA for the written pleading instituting the revocation proceedings. Pursuant to Art 49(6) UPCA, the language of proceedings at the central division will normally be the language in which the patent concerned w
Externí odkaz:
https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::e2d1c5856d14a3c8ca8df4c222c62993
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0237
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0237
Publikováno v:
Unified Patent Protection in Europe: A Commentary
Within two months of service of the Defence to revocation the claimant may lodge a Reply to the Defence to revocation together with any Defence to an Application to amend the patent pursuant to Rule 43.3 and 55 as well as any Defence to the Countercl
Externí odkaz:
https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::99b09b1d1772229b18eed920955a6b66
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0243
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0243
Publikováno v:
Unified Patent Protection in Europe: A Commentary
Rule 42 UPCARoP relates to standing to be sued in revocation actions. According to Rule 42, a revocation action must be directed against the patent proprietor. In terms of its meaning, Rule 42 corresponds to Art 47(5) UPCA which stipulates for an act
Externí odkaz:
https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::fe4dd9973f9705bcf3db2b1d9ab50b20
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0234
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0234
Publikováno v:
Unified Patent Protection in Europe: A Commentary
The Defence to revocation must show whether the defendant responds to the revocation action. This is necessary to establish between which persons the procedural law relationship arises.
Externí odkaz:
https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::8724324f3b4c78f6b929d4e9bbed8b92
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0242
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0242
Publikováno v:
Unified Patent Protection in Europe: A Commentary
Rule 43 UPCARoP sets out, in the form of a summary and overview, the written procedure of the revocation action. Provisions for the interim procedure are found in Chapter 2 (Rules 101–110). Provisions for the oral procedure are found in Chapter 3 (
Externí odkaz:
https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::4a6b5c311e646d9bd0277ac35a24963d
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0235
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0235
Publikováno v:
Unified Patent Protection in Europe: A Commentary
The possibility of an extension to the time period is provided for in Rule 9.3 which does not stipulate the specific cases in which the UPC will grant an extension to the time period and nor does it specify any conditions that have to be met for an e
Externí odkaz:
https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::21875958ac11173bf32c654ce0db4741
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0248
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0248