ground that Baldwin’s involved claims are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 112, or alternatively
under 35 U.S.C. §§102/103. Baldwin filed a responsive preliminary motion 1 to add claims 51-
55 to its involved application and to designate those claims as corresponding to the count.
For the reasons that follow, we deny Frohlich miscellaneous motion 1, grant-in-part
Frohlich preliminary motion 2, and deny Baldwin preliminary motion 1.
B. Findings of fact
The following findings of fact, as well as those contained elsewhere in this opinion are
supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
1. Frohlich is involved on the basis of Patent 5,884,006 (‘006), granted 16 March 1999,
based on application 08/954,318, filed 17 October 1997.
2. Baldwin is involved on the basis of application 09/526,026, filed 15 March 2000.
3. Baldwin has been accorded benefit for the purpose of priority of application
09/204,013, filed 1 December 1998 and application 08/706,651, filed 6 September 1996.
4. Frohlich’s real party in interest is Energy Storage Technologies, Inc. (EST) (Paper
5).
5. Baldwin’s real party in interest is Vesture Corporation (Paper 9).
6. The interfering subject matter pertains to a storage unit that contains a layer of phase
change material, and a heater assembly on one side of the layer of phase change material for
charging the phase change material.
7. Count 1, the sole count of the interference, is as follows:
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007