Interference No. 103,669
evidence, we credit Arthur R. Steitz with a corroborated
actual reduction to practice date of November 30, 1994.
Inasmuch as we have credited junior party Steitz
with an invention date prior to the effective filing date of
the senior party, and the senior party has relied on his
filing date as his date of invention, the junior party has
overcome the senior party’s date of invention. Judgment will
be entered in favor of the junior party.
Judgment
Judgment in Interference No. 103,669 is entered in
favor of the junior party, Arthur R. Steitz. Arthur R. Steitz
is entitled to a patent containing claims 1 through 18, which
claims correspond to the count in interference. Judgment is
entered against Robert L. Bentley, the senior party. Robert
L. Bentley is not entitled to a patent containing claims 2,
18, 20, 21, 27, and 28, which claims correspond to the count
in interference.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007