KIPOURAS et al. V. BARNHOUSE et al. - Page 12




          Interference No. 103,029                                                    



          Accordingly, the Kipouras motion to withdraw these exhibits is              
          GRANTED.                                                                    
                    The Kipouras motion to suppress has been GRANTED in               
          its entirety.                                                               


          Decision on Kipouras Motion for Benefit                                     
                    Benefit for priority purposes is determined with                  
          respect to the count.  A party is entitled to the benefit of                
          an earlier filed application for priority purposes if he or                 
          she is in compliance with 35 U.S.C.  112, first paragraph,                 
          with respect to at least one species within the count.  Mori                
          v. Costain, 214 USPQ 295, 297 (Bd. Pat. Int. 1981), citing                  
          Weil v. Fritz, 572 F.2d 856, 865 n.16, 196 USPQ 600, 608-09                 
          n.16 (CCPA 1978); Hunt v. Treppschuh, 523 F.2d 1386, 1389, 187              
          USPQ 426, 429 (CCPA 1975); and Den Beste v. Martin, 252 F.2d                
          302, 305, 116 USPQ 584, 586 (CCPA 1958).                                    
                    The earlier application must contain a written                    
          description of the subject matter of the interference count,                
          and                                                                         



                                          12                                          





Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007