Bloink has advised the Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences that the assignee of U.S. Patent Nš 5,279,753,
issued January 18, 1994, has filed a STATUTORY DISCLAIMER in
which it "disclaims claims 1-13" of the patent. See TRANSMITTAL
OF STATUTORY DISCLAIMER (Paper No. 12). Claims 1-13 are all the
claims in the patent and correspond to Count 2, the only count
remaining in the interference.
Filing a statutory disclaimer under 35 U.S.C. § 253 of all
claims of a patent involved in an interference shall be taken as
a request for an entry of an adverse judgment. 37 CFR
§ 1.662(c). See also Guinn v. Kopf, 96 F.3d 1419, 40 USPQ2d 1157
(Fed. Cir. 1996). Accordingly, a judgment shall be entered
against Bloink with respect to count 2 and claims 1-13 of U.S.
Patent Nš 5,279,753.
B.
Bloink suggests that the Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences lacked subject matter jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 135(c) at the time the interference was declared over Bloink
U.S. Patent Nš 5,149,454, granted September 22, 1992. Bloink
bottoms his suggestion on the fact that a necessary maintenance
fee had not been paid in connection with the patent. See MOTION
TO TERMINATE INTERFERENCE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION (Paper
No. 13). We are advised that it is the assignee's intent "not
to revive the above patent." Id. at 2.
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007