Interference No. 104,191
MARTIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
As a result of Omnipoint's common ownership of the
involved junior party patent and the involved senior party
application, the APJ ordered Omnipoint to show cause why
judgment should not be entered on priority grounds in favor of
the senior party and against the junior party (paper No. 12).
Omnipoint responded to the show cause order by identifying the
senior party as the first inventor and requesting the entry of
judgment in favor of the senior party (paper No. 15). That
request is being construed as a request under § 1.662(a) for
entry of adverse judgment against junior party Honig et al. for
lack of priority, which request is granted. As a result, Honig
et al. are not entitled to a patent containing their patent
claims that correspond to the count, i.e., claims 1-18.
Judgment therefore is awarded to Jensen et al., who are entitled
to a patent containing their application claims that correspond
to the count, i.e., claims 10-21.
)
__________________________ )
ANDREW H. METZ )
Administrative Patent Judge)
)
) BOARD OF
__________________________ ) PATENT APPEALS
WILLIAM F. PATE, III ) AND
Administrative Patent Judge) INTERFERENCES
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007