Interference No. 103,343
Because, as required by 37 CFR § 1.690(c), the
Arbitrator’s November 10, 1998, "AWARD OF PRIORITY" is binding
on the parties, is in writing, and states in a clear and
definite manner the issue to be decided (i.e., priority) and
the disposition of that issue, judgment on the issue of
priority is being entered in accordance with that award. The
Arbitrator determined that Chin et al. failed to prove a date
of invention prior to Kieturakis’s June 2, 1992, filing date,
and also that Kieturakis achieved an actual reduction to
practice on September 30, 1991. The determination that
Kieturakis reduced to practice on September 30, 1991, renders
moot Chin et al.’s request for reconsideration filed October
19, 1998, which seeks review of our decision mailed September
17, 1998, to the extent we denied Chin et al.’s 37 CFR §
1.633(f) motion for benefit of the November 19, 1991, filing
date of Moll et al. application Serial No. 07/794,590 (Patent
No. 5,309,896). Chin et al.’s request for reconsideration is
therefore dismissed as moot.
In accordance with the arbitration award, judgment
on the issue of priority is hereby entered against Chin et
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007