Bloink is factually correct that at the time the
interference was declared, a required maintenance fee had not
been paid in connection with U.S. Patent Nš 5,149,454. Hence,
the patent had expired. The board does not have jurisdiction to
declare an interference between a pending application and an
expired patent. 35 U.S.C. § 135(c); Petrie v. Welsh, 21 USPQ2d
2012 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1991). Accordingly, this interference
should be terminated without entry of a judgment with respect to
U.S. Patent Nš 5,149,454.
II.
Order
Upon consideration of the record, and for the reasons given,
it is
ORDERED that with respect to U.S. Patent Nš 5,279,753,
issued January 18, 1994 and Count 2 (see Paper No. 7, page 21),
the sole count in the interference, judgment is entered
against Junior Party Raymond L. Bloink, Bradley W. Kibbel and
Bob R. Powell.
FURTHER ORDERED that Junior Party Raymond L. Bloink,
Bradley W. Kibbel and Bob R. Powell is not entitled to a patent
containing claims 1-13 (corresponding to Count 2) of U.S. Patent
Nš 5,279,753, issued January 18, 1994.
FURTHER ORDERED that, on this record, and with respect
to the interference between Bloink U.S. Patent Nš 5,279,753 and
Shima application 08/461,753, filed June 5, 1995, Senior Party
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007