BJORNSON et al. V. Parce et al. - Page 2




                  Interference No.  105,444                                                                                                               
                  Bjornson v. Parce                                                                                                                       


            1              On February 22, 2007, junior party Bjornson conceded priority and requested entry of                                           
            2     adverse judgment with respect to the subject matter of Count 1 (Paper No. 43).  No motion is                                            
            3     pending in this case.                                                                                                                   
            4              The request for entry of adverse judgment is granted.                                                                          
            5              It is                                                                                                                          
            6              ORDERED that judgment on priority as to the subject matter of Count 1 is herein                                                
            7     entered against junior party TORLEIF OVE BJORNSON, RANDY M. McCORMICK and                                                               
            8     DAVID S. SOANE;                                                                                                                         
            9              FURTHER ORDERED that junior party TORLEIF OVE BJORNSON, RANDY M.                                                               
          10      McCORMICK and DAVID S. SOANE is not entitled to claims 1-17 of its involved Patent No.                                                  
          11      6,103,199;                                                                                                                              
          12               FURTHER ORDERED that if there is a settlement agreement, the parties should note                                               
          13      the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 135(c) and Bd. Rule 205; and                                                                            
          14               FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this judgment be placed in the respective                                                       
          15      involved application or patent of the parties.                                                                                          











                                                                            2                                                                             



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013