DANBY et al. V. YAMAZAKI - Page 2




                 2.       Preliminary statements and preliminary motions were due January 23, 1997.  Paper 2, p. 1.                                     
                 3.       In a paper entered November 5, 1997, junior party Danby moved to extend the time for filing                                   
                 preliminary statements and motions until March 23, 1998.  Paper 5, p 1.                                                                
                 4.       The motion was granted by APJ Ronald Smith.  Paper 9, p. 1.                                                                   
                 5.       No preliminary statement or preliminary motions are of record in the interference file.                                       
                 6.       In a telephone conversation with paralegal specialist Yolunda Townes on April 9, 1999, counsel                                
                 for Danby indicated that no preliminary statement or motions were or would be filed.                                                   
                 Discussion                                                                                                                             
                          Section 1.629(c) of 37 CFR provides:                                                                                          
                          1.629 Effect of preliminary statement.                                                                                        
                                                              * * * * *                                                                                 
                                   (c)      If a party does not file a preliminary statement, the party:                                                
                                           (1)      Shall be restricted to the party's effective filing date and                                       
                                           (2)      Will not be permitted to prove that:                                                               
                                                     (i)      The party made the invention prior to the party's filing                                  
                                                              date or                                                                                   
                                                     (ii)     Any opponent derived the invention from the party.                                        
                 Since Danby did not file a preliminary statement, Danby is restricted to its filing date of May 19, 1987.  37                          
                 CFR 1.629(c).  As this date is subsequent to Yamazaki’s effective filing date of March 23, 1987,                                       
                 Yamazaki is presumbtively the first to invent the subject matter of the count.  37 CFR 1.657(a). Because                               
                 it did not file a preliminary statement, Danby is not permitted prove that it made the invention prior to its                          
                 filing date (37 CFR § 1.629(c)(2)(i)) or to present a case-in-chief (37 CFR § 1.651(c)(2)).  Since Danby                               
                 filed no preliminary motions and is precluded from proving a date of invention earlier than Yamazaki’s filing                          
                 date, under the particular facts of this case, the issuance of an order to show cause (37 CFR §1.640(d)(2))                            
                 is unnecessary and entry of a final judgment at this time is appropriate.  Accordingly, it is                                          
                          ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1, the sole count in this interference, is awarded                              
                 against junior party GORDON T. DANBY, CHARLES E. BRUKL and LAWRENCE A. MINKOFF;                                                        
                          FURTHER ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1 is awarded in favor of senior party                                   
                 SHUNPEI YAMAZAKI;                                                                                                                      

                                                                           2                                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007