Interference No. 103,036
E. Whether Burroughs et al.'s claims are unpatentable under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, and failure to comply with
35 U.S.C. § 251, as urged in the party Wang et al.’s motion no. 5
(Paper No. 132).
3. Other Motions
A. Whether the party Burroughs et al. should be denied the
benefit of the filing date of its patent for failure to meet the
requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112, first and second paragraphs, and
for failure to comply with 35 U.S.C. § 251, as urged in the party
Wang et al.’s motion no. 4 (Paper No. 131).
B. The party Cataldi et al.’s motion no. 23 that the party
Burroughs et al.’s reissue claims are unpatentable for double
patenting.
C. The party Burroughs et al.’s motion under 37 CFR §§ 1.635 and
1.662(b) that the party Cataldi et al.’s claims are unpatentable.
4. Additional Issue
In Interlocutory Order No. 10, consideration of the
party Wang et al.'s miscellaneous motion no. 20 (Paper No. 656)
to compel the party Burroughs et al. to produce Messrs. Burroughs
and O'Kain for examination on oral deposition was deferred to
final hearing provided that the party file a paper within five
days after final hearing requesting consideration of the matter.
-7-
Page: Previous 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007