Interference No. 103,197
B. The issues
The issues before us are:
(1) whether Mannheimer's § 1.633(a) motion should be
granted to the extent it asserts the unpatentability of
Buschmann claim 28 and other Buschmann claims over Kapany;23
(2) whether, as Mannheimer contends, all claims directed
to the I-I species are unpatentable over Kapany and that
generic Count 5 therefore should be replaced by Buschmann’s
proposed Counts 2 and 4, which are limited to the O-I and I-O
species, respectively, or by Mannheimer’s proposed Count MAN-
3, which is limited to both of these species;
(3) whether, as requested in his § 1.635 motion, Morrison
should be granted leave to file the corrected preliminary
statement that accompanied the motion;
(4) whether, as urged in Buschmann's motion under24
§§ 1.635 and 1.656(h), some of Morrison’s priority evidence
should be suppressed; and
As Morrison's opening brief does not rely or discuss23
any of the other references cited in the motion, they have not
been considered. See Photis v. Lunkenheimer, 225 USPQ 948,
950 (Bd.Pat.Int. 1984) (matters not raised in the brief are
ordinarily regarded as abandoned).
Paper No. 154.24
- 7 -
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007