<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Polish IP &#38; IT law - copyright trademark computer internet telecomm &#187; Polish patent attorneys</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rychlicki.net/en/issue/polish-chamber-of-patent-attorneys/polish-patent-attorneys/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rychlicki.net/en</link>
	<description>Tomasz Rychlicki Intellectual Property Law Internet Law IT Law Computer Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 10:32:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Access to public information, case I OSK 2026/11</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/05/23/8196/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/05/23/8196/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 09:16:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 17 Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 6 API]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on access to public information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish patent attorneys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Supreme Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=8196</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 5 February 2011, Bogusław Kler, a Polish patent and trade mark attorney, requested Anna Korbela, the President of the Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys, to disclose information concerning, inter alia, copy of the audio recording of the National Convention of Patent Attorneys that was held in 2010. The President answered that this request should [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/05/23/8196/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Polish patent attorneys, case II GSK 833/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/20/7371/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/20/7371/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 12:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 107 §3 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 153 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Administrative Proceedings Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish patent attorneys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Supreme Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7371</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Administrative Court in its judgment of 1 September 2011 case file II GSK 833/10 decided the cassation appeal that was filed by the National Council of Patent Attorneys in the case of the candidate for the patent attorney traineeship. The candiate did not agree with grades that she received during the entry exam. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/20/7371/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Polish patent attorneys &#8211; amendments to the law</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/26/6458/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/26/6458/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:38:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Patent Attorneys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish patent attorneys]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=6458</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 26 January 2011, the Act of 24 September 2010 amending the Polish Act on Patent Attorneys, published in Journal of Laws No. 197, item 1308, came into force. According to recent changes Polish patent attorneys may now represent clients in matters related to combating unfair competition. Patent attorney whose practice is based on the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/26/6458/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 503/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/20/4673/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/20/4673/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 14:20:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Administrative Proceedings Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish patent attorneys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark refusal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trademark law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=4673</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In January 2010, Polish company LMW sp z o.o. represented by a patent attorney filed via the Polish Patent Office (PPO) a complaint to the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw, against the decision of the PPO on the refusal to grant a right of protection for LIBERTY MOTORS trade mark Z-315048. In the Court’s order [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/07/20/4673/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Polish patent attorneys, case II GZ 224/09</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/06/28/4224/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/06/28/4224/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 13:21:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 178 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 194 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 197 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Administrative Proceedings Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish patent attorneys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Supreme Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=4224</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Administrative Court in its judgment of 18 May 2010, case file II GZ 224/09 ruled that the Act on the Law on proceedings before administrative courts – PBAC – (in Polish: Prawo o postępowaniu przed sądami administracyjnymi) of 30 August 2002, Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) No 153, item 1270, with later amendments, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/06/28/4224/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

