LIEBERMAN V. INOUE et al. - Page 2

          Interference No. 104,362                                                     
          Lieberman v. Inoue                                                           

          LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.                                            
               On August 31, 2000, senior party Inoue filed a paper                    
          (Paper No. 7) entitled “Senior Party Inoue’s Notice of Intent                
          Not to Contest the Interference,” in which it is stated:                     
          “Senior party Inoue, Tsuda, Nagai, Sakai & Nakamura hereby                   
          advises that it does not intend to contest the interference as               
          defined by count 1.”                                                         
               The submission is regarded as a concession of priority                  
          and/or abandonment of the contest with respect to the subject                
          matter of the count.  Under 37 CFR  1.662(a), it is also                    
          treated as a request for entry of adverse judgment.                          
               Junior party Lieberman has filed a response (Paper No. 8)               
          in which Lieberman objects to an alleged inference in party                  
          Inoue’s concession of priority that Inoue can contest the                    
          interference in  some other way without filing a motion under                
          37 CFR  1.633(c)(1) to substitute a different count.  The                   
          response further states: “Inoue cannot reserve its ‘right’ to                
          fight another day.  The time to fight, if it is going to                     
          fight, is now.”                                                              
               Lieberman’s response also states: “I am attaching a copy                


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007