Interference No. 101,981
Whether Batlogg’s Application Complies With The Best Mode
Requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112
A best mode issue with respect to Batlogg’s application was
raised by Qadri in a timely filed preliminary motion for judgment
(Q6; paper no. 39). That motion was denied (paper no. 131).
Qadri seeks review of the preliminary motion.
The grounds on which Qadri base their request for review
were not raised in their preliminary motion but rather on new
grounds in Qadri’s belated motion QM4 (paper no. 241). Qadri (QB
88-92) argues that Batlogg’s application does not set forth a
best mode for carrying out their invention on two new grounds: a)
Batlogg knew at the time they filed their application that barium
carbonate was a better starting material than barium oxide for
preparing the composition and yet did not disclose this and
prepared all samples from barium carbonate, and b) although
Batlogg’s application states that ‘carbonates’ could be used (p.
8, line 17), does not suggest using barium carbonate. These are
the only reasons we are given for reviewing the preliminary
motion. Since neither of these grounds are mentioned in the
preliminary motion, no reason has been given not to affirm the
APJ’s denial of the preliminary motion.
64
Page: Previous 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007