HOSHINO et al V. TANAKA - Page 19




          Interference No. 103,208                                                    
          Hoshino et al. v. Tanaka                                                    

          coefficient, and ÎBf is the defocus amount.  (Hoshino patent,               
          column 4, lines 12-39).                                                     
               According to Tanaka, this corrected coefficient is called              
          S  and is determined by the formula: S  = S  + A x f(Îd) whered                                d  0                                    
          S  represents the original constant conversion coefficient                  
           0                                                                          
          (like K  in Hoshino’s patent), A is a correction coefficient                
                 0                                                                    
          like Hoshino’s C , and f(Îd) represents a function of the                   
                          0                                                           
          focus deviation Îd (like the defocus amount ÎBf in Hoshino’s                
          patent).  (Tanaka application, pages 12-13).                                
                                     Discussion                                       
               At issue before us is whether Hoshino’s Motion H2,                     
          together with the evidence submitted therewith, is sufficient               
          to make out a prima facie basis for the relief sought.  We                  
          conclude, for reasons discussed in more detail below, that it               
          does not.  Like                                                             
          the APJ did in rendering the decision on motions, we have not               
          considered the new points contained in and the evidence                     
          submitted                                                                   
          with Tanaka’s opposition to Hoshino’s Motion H2.  Accordingly,              
          Hoshino’s reply and evidence submitted with the reply need not              
          be and have not been considered.  Per 37 CFR § 1.638(b)(1993),              

                                       - 19 -                                         





Page:  Previous  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007