Interference No. 103,036
Wang et al. were to prove priority of invention vis-à-vis the
party Burroughs et al., that would not change the fact that the
party Tucholski lost the priority contest to the party Burroughs
et al. Since the party Tucholski's claims are not patentable,
the party Tucholski has no right to remain in this interference.
As the proceeding now stands, the issuance of judgment
against the party Tucholski is deemed proper, inasmuch as we have
held that the party Burroughs et al.'s claims 13 to 29, 33 to 40
and 43 to 51 are not unpatentable for the reasons alleged by the
party Tucholski. Even if we held that the Burroughs et al.
claims 13 to 29, 33 to 40 and 43 to 51 were unpatentable for the
reasons alleged by the party Tucholski, the party Tucholski did
not attack the patentability of the party Burroughs et al.'s
original patent claim 1 to 11 corresponding to the count, and
these claims would remain in the interference.
Motion to Compel--(Issue 7)
In the motion, the party Tucholski requests that we
compel the party Burroughs et al. to produce Messrs. James R.
Burroughs and Alan N. O'Kain for examination upon their joint
declaration under Rule 132, which was filed ex parte in the
-74-
Page: Previous 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007