Interference No. 104,241
why summary judgment against the junior party was proper.
Further, the APJ provided Jeon et al. an opportunity to reply
to any papers filed by Cupps et al. See, generally, Paper
Number 5.
In response to the APJ's order, the following papers were
filed in this proceeding:
"SENIOR PARTY CUPPS AND BOGDAN STATEMENT UNDER 37
C.F.R. 1.617(d)", filed on April 6, 1999 (c.o.m.
April 1, 1999 - Paper Number 6);
"SENIOR PARTY CUPPS AND BOGDAN
OPPOSITION NO. 1", filed on April 6, 1999 (c.o.m.
April 1, 1999 - Paper Number 7);
"REPLY OF PARTY
JEON TO SENIOR PARTY CUPPS AND BOGDAN OPPOSITION NO.
1", filed on April 20, 1999 (c.o.m. April 16, 1999 -
Paper Number 8);
"REPLY OF
JUNIOR PARTY JEON UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 1.617(e) TO
SENIOR PARTY CUPPS AND BOGDAN'S STATEMENT UNDER 37
C.F.R. § 1.617(d)", filed on April 20, 1999 (c.o.m.
April 16, 1999 - Paper Number 9);
ISSUES
The issues presented to this merits panel of the Board
are: (1) was the order to show cause issued by the APJ in
Paper Number 2 properly issued; (2) should the additional
evidence furnished by the party Jeon et al. subsequent to the
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007