MORRISON v. LAKES et al - Page 2




               A.   Findings of fact                                                  
               The record supports the following findings by at least a               
          preponderance of the evidence.1                                             
                    1.   The interference involves (1) junior party                   
          patentee David S. Morrison (Morrison) and (2) senior party                  
          applicants Stephen C. Lakes; Henry G. Stoeppel, II, and Bruce J.            
          Beimesch (Lakes).                                                           
                    2.   Morrison is involved in the interference on the              
          basis of Morrison U.S. Patent 5,378,249, issued 3 January 1995,             
          based on application 08/082,696, filed 28 June 1993.                        
                    3.   The real party in interest is Pennzoil Products              
          Company.                                                                    
                    4.   Lakes is involved in the interference on the basis           
          of two applications:                                                        
                         a.   Application 08/442,611, filed 17 May 1995 and           
                         b.   Application 08/896,060, filed 17 July 1997.             

                    5.   The real party in interest is Henkel Corporation.            
                    6.   Lakes has been accorded benefit of the purpose of            
          priority of:                                                                
                         a.   Application 08/119,318, filed 9 September               
                              1993 and                                                
                         b.   Application 07/937,625, filed 28 August 1992.           

                    7.   The interference involves two counts.                        


          1   To the extent these findings of fact discuss legal issues, they may be  
          treated as conclusions of law.                                              
                                        - 2 -                                         





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007