Interference No. 103,141
directed to the subject matter of cladding with orifices. New
count 3 is
directed to the subject matter of orifice-free cladding.
Note, however, that both new counts are still limited to the
cross-section reduction with subsequent sintering species.16
According to Sawada, “Proposed Count A defines the
essential common elements between the parties and permits the
party Sawada to rely on its best proofs without prejudice to
the proofs of party Jin.” Sawada Brief, page 9. Both parties
and this panel are in agreement that the cross-section
reduction with subsequent sintering species, and the sintering
with simultaneous or subsequent cross-section reduction
species are separate species. See Sawada Brief at page 12,
lines 3-7 and lines 15-17; Jin Brief at page 4. Sawada’s
argument is that Sawada is entitled to a generic count which
comprises both species so that the junior party may rely on
its best proofs, i.e., the sintering with simultaneous or
subsequent cross-section reduction species not in counts 2 and
3.
16Judge Smith also broadened the definition of T found in
C
the new counts 2 and 3. That change is not contested here.
15
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007