Interference No. 104,166
Patel v. Fuller
8. Within the 20 day period for the junior party to
respond to the order to show cause, senior party Fuller filed
a miscellaneous motion pointing out that the show cause order
did not address the matter of the senior party’s pending
motions to add a new count, and requesting that the
interference be re-declared with count 2, 3, or 4, as proposed
in the senior party’s preliminary motions.
9. Junior party Patel did not respond to senior party
Fuller’s miscellaneous motion.
10. Senior party Fuller’s preliminary motions 1, 2, and
3, and miscellaneous motion stand unopposed.
11. To this date, junior party Patel has not filed any
paper, with the possible exception of a paper filed by its
counsel to seek withdrawal as attorneys. See Paper No. 5.
12. The request by junior party’s counsel to withdraw
was granted by administrative patent judge Murriel Crawford.
C. Discussion
Party Fuller’s preliminary motion 1 to add proposed count
2 is unopposed. The motion is granted-in-part. No reason has
been shown by party Fuller to have count 2 deviate from the
language of Patel’s claim 1 or Fuller’s claim 80.
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007