Interference No. 105,041 Paper 26
Syngenta Participations AG v. Bayer CropScience GmbH Page 6
ORDER
Upon consideration of the joint motion and the request for adverse judgment, it is:
ORDERED that claims 43-51, 56, 94-102, and 107 of the Syngenta application be
redesignated as not corresponding to Count 1;
FURTHER ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1 is awarded against junior
party Syngenta Participations AG;
FURTHER ORDERED that Syngenta is not entitled to a patent containing claims 57-59,
69-71, 81-83, 93, 108-110, 114-116, 120-122, and 126 of the Syngenta 086 application, which
correspond to Count 1;
FURTHER ORDERED that, based on the record before us, Bayer CropScience GmbH is
entitled to a patent containing claims that correspond to Count 1;
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of the Wernsman declaration be entered into the
Syngenta 086 application; and
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this decision be given a paper number and be
entered in the administrative records of Syngenta's 086 application and Bayer's 993 application.
JAMESON LEE
Administrative Patent Judge BOARD OF PATENT
APPEALS AND
RICHARD TORCZON INTERFERENCES
Administrative Patent Judge
INTERFERENCE
CAROL A. SPIEGEL TRIAL SECTION
Administrative Patent Judge
Entered: 7 May 2003
Notice: Any agreement or understanding between parties to this interference, including any collateral agreements
referred to therein, made in connection with or in contemplation of the termination of the interference, shall be in writing
and a true copy thereof filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office before termination of the interference as
between said parties to the agreement or understanding. 35 U.S.C. 135(c); 37 C.F.R. § 1.661.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007