Interference No. 104,241
the showing is found by the APJ to be adequate to make out a
prima facie case of entitlement to judgment, then and only
then is an interference declared and allowed to proceed as any
other ordinary interference. Thus, Jeon et al.'s reliance on
both the examiner's alleged determination that an interference
be declared and the examiner's alleged "implicit" finding of
utility was misplaced.
Moreover, the question before us is not whether or not
Jeon et al.'s compounds embraced by their sole claim
corresponding to
35
Page: Previous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007