Interference No. 103,036
releases into the record. See Interlocutory Order No. 9, Section
IV.
Opinion re: Issue 3(iii)
The junior party Tucholski's position on this matter is
untenable. The APJ has not caused added expense and complication
to this proceeding by permitting the senior party to seek review
of its Category B motions. As the APJ noted, the senior party is
already relying upon all of the declarations, except the
aforesaid declarations of Mr. Peterson, to support the senior
party's oppositions to the junior parties' motions. Under those
circumstances, we find no abuse of discretion in the APJ's
actions. Nor did the APJ's action unduly delay or complicate
this proceeding.
Issue 3(iv)
With respect to item 3(iv), the motion is dismissed as
moot inasmuch as the party Tucholski's reply has withdrawn this
item.
Retention of the Party Tucholski--Issue (4)
The party Tucholski requests that it be retained as a
party to this interference regardless of the outcome of the first
-72-
Page: Previous 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007