SAWADA et al. V. JIN et al. - Page 10

                 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                                                                                                                 
                                   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.                                                                                                             

Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007