Interference No. 103,036 In Interlocutory Order No. 2, dated May 10, 1996 (Paper No. 494), the Administrative Patent Judge (APJ) listed and acknowledged the 91 preliminary and miscellaneous motions and requests, the various oppositions, replies thereto and comments7 to various oppositions and replies, filed by the parties. In addition, the APJ opened preliminary statements and ordered their service. At the same time, the APJ placed the junior parties Tucholski and Cataldi et al. under an order pursuant to 37 CFR 1.640(d)(3) to show cause why judgment should not be entered8 In an order, dated December 12, 1994 (Paper No. 77), the APJ7 in charge of the interference at that time authorized the parties to file comments in support of or in opposition to a motion directed at another party. This section reads, in part, as follows:8 § 1.640 Motions, hearings and decision, redeclaration of interference, order to show cause. * * * * * (d) An administrative patent judge may issue an order to show cause why judgment should not be entered against a party when: * * * * * (3) The party is a junior party whose preliminary statement fails to overcome the effective filing date of another party. -4-Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007