Interference No. 103,141
introduced during the preliminary motion period, including
declarations, into evidence and scheduled a period for cross
examination. Both parties have waived cross-examination.8 9
Inasmuch as a testimony period has been established, and all
evidence admitted after the junior party’s motion to strike a
portion of the brief was filed, the junior party’s motion to
strike is DISMISSED.10
Background
The interference was originally declared on March
23, 1993 with Jin as junior party and Sawada as senior party.
Sawada was accorded benefit of his parent U.S. Serial No.
07/152,713, filed February 5, 1988, and Japanese application
62-77941, filed March 31, 1987. Jin’s patent was accorded
benefit of U.S. Serial No. 07/034,117 filed on April 1, 1987.
8Paper No. 132, mailed June 6, 2000.
9Paper No. 133, received July 11, 2000.
10It is further noted that moving party Sawada has
benefitted from having testimony entered sua sponte by the
panel. Without evidence in the form of the Sato declaration,
Sawada’s motion based on non-enablement would have no
evidentiary underpinnings.
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007