Interference No. 104,804 Paper 45
Rohr v. McNulty
On May 30, 2003, junior party Rohr filed a notice that it
would not take priority testimony in this case. (Paper 44 at 2.)
Rohr also "proposes that the Board enter judgment on priority be
entered in favor of McNulty and enter judgment confirming the
Board's decision on the preliminary motions (Paper No. 36), as
adhered to on reconsideration." (Id.)
Rohr's decision not to take priority testimony and its
"proposal" are accepted as a concession of priority in this
interference. "When the Board enters a decision awarding
judgment as to all counts, the decision shall be regarded as a
final decision for the purpose of judicial review (35 U.S.C.
141–144, 146)." 37 CFR § 1.658(a). Thus, the decision on
preliminary motions is incorporated in this Final Judgment.
ORDER
In consideration of the foregoing facts, it is:
ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1 is awarded
against junior party Rohr;
FURTHER ORDERED that William Rohr is not entitled to a
patent containing claims 1–12 of Rohr's 6,143,232 patent, which
correspond to Count 1;
FURTHER ORDERED that any request for reconsideration be
filed within one month from the date of this judgment; and
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007