Interference No. 102,668
sufficient cause (hereinafter, good cause ) for their7
8 9
belatedness. After the APJ had issued a schedule setting
dates for the parties to present priority testimony and to
file records and briefs but before the start of Cavanagh's
testimony-in-chief period, McMahon again raised the foregoing
patentability issue by filing a belated § 1.633(a) motion10
accompanied by the first Jones affidavit, the Lindberg
affidavit and a new affidavit by McMahon's counsel, Mark
Bicks, purporting to explain the delay in filing the Lindberg
affidavit. The belated motion was denied by the APJ because11
the Bicks affidavit failed to show good cause for the delay in
filing the Lindberg affidavit.
Effective April 21, 1995, the term "sufficient cause" in7
§ 1.645(b) was changed to "good cause" to be consistent with the
terminology used in other interference rules. Patent Appeal and
Interference Practice -- Final Rule, 60 Fed. Reg. 14,488, 14,513
(March 17, 1995); 1173 Off. Gaz. Pat. & Trademark Office 36, 57
(April 11, 1995) (hereinafter 1995 Final Rule Notice).
Paper Nos. 66 and 72.8
Paper No. 73.9
Paper No. 77.10
Paper No. 80; adhered to on reconsideration in paper No.11
85.
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007