Interference 103,685
as corresponding to proposed Count 2 and new Claims 69-71 as
corresponding to the interference count (Paper Nos. 22 and 23).
December 2, 1996 - Riggins filed Riggins’ contingent
Preliminary Motion 3 under 37 CFR § 1.633(f) to accord all
Riggins’ claims designated as corresponding to Count 2, namely
Claims 1-13 and 65-68 of Riggins’ involved application, benefit
for the purpose of priority of Riggins’ parent application filed
March 16, 1992, and Riggins’ grandparent application filed
October 31, 1990 (Paper No. 21). Riggins’ Preliminary Motion 3
is said to be contingent upon Riggins’ Preliminary Motion 2 being
granted.
December 2, 1996 - Riggins filed Riggins’ contingent
Preliminary Motion 6 under 37 CFR §§ 1.633(c)(2-3) to add new
Claims 72-76, and designate new Claims 72-76 as corresponding
to Count 1 (Paper No. 24). Riggins’ Preliminary Motion 6 is
contingent upon Riggins’ Preliminary Motions 1 and 2 being
denied (Paper No. 24, p. 2, first para.).
December 2, 1996 - Holsten filed Holsten’s Preliminary
Motion 1 under 37 CFR § 1.633(a) for judgment that Claims 65-68
of Riggins’ involved application are unpatentable under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph (Paper No. 26).
December 2, 1996 - Holsten filed Holsten’s Preliminary
Motion 2 under 37 CFR § 1.633(a) for judgment that Claims 65-68
-13-
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007