Interference No. 103,036
Benedict, 27 F.3d 539, 544, 30 USPQ2d 1862, 1866 (Fed. Cir.
1994). In this case, the benefit obtained by the party Cataldi
et al. is (i) to have all the Burroughs et al. patent claims
designated as corresponding to the count so that if the party
Burroughs et al. loses the priority contest, the party Burroughs
et al. would lose all of its patent claims designated as
corresponding to the count and (ii) to have the opportunity to
file another preliminary motion for judgment, i.e., motion no.
24, a motion which the party Cataldi et al. seeks review of at
this hearing.
For the foregoing reasons, the party Cataldi et al.'s
motion no. 1 is dismissed.
MATTERS ENTITLED TO REVIEW AT FINAL HEARING
Patentability of the Party Burroughs et al.'s
Claims (Issues 3 to 6 and 8)
Issues (3 and 8)
The party Cataldi et al.'s opening brief requests that
(i) we decide the party Cataldi et al.'s motion nos. 2 and 3831
which urge that the party Burroughs et al.'s patent claims 1 to
In response to the motion no. 2, the party Burroughs et al.31
filed an amendment. Since we entered the amendment, we will consider
motion no. 38 which concerns the patentability of reissue claim 40.
-13-
Page: Previous 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007