brief, Bourdeau has filed a motion to exclude certain evidence
submitted by Okajima. (Paper 52).
A final hearing was held on August 9, 2000.
B. Findings of Fact
1. The interference was declared on April 30, 1998.
2. Okajima is involved on the basis of U.S. application
08/665,679, filed June 18, 1996.
3. Bourdeau is involved on the basis of U.S.
application 08/676,928, filed July 8, 1996.
4. By virtue of a decision of Bourdeau’s preliminary
motion 1, Bourdeau has been accorded the benefit for the
purpose of priority of French application 95.08587, filed July
11, 1995. (Paper 43 at 15).
Okajima’s brief
5. Okajima maintains that Bourdeau’s claims 13-24 and
26-28 are unpatentable in view of various prior art. (Paper
45 at 1).
6. In its preliminary motion 2 (Paper 13½), Okajima
moved for judgment against Bourdeau’s claims 13-24 and 26-28
based on alternate theories that Bourdeau’s claims 13-24 and
26-28 were unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over:
a) European Patent Office Publication 356 400 (EP
‘400), published February 28, 1990 in view of German
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007