Discussion
Baldwin’s motion seeks to add the Bradley J. Knapp and Fred M. Kimock as additional inventors
to the Baldwin involved patent. Baldwin has complied with the provisions of 37 CFR §§ 1.634, 1.324
and 3.73(b). Accordingly, the motion is granted.
Knapp moves under 37 CFR 1.635 to cancel Claim 35, the sole involved claim in the Knapp
application. The motion is granted. Knapp Claim 35 is identical to the count. Accordingly, the cancellation
of Claim 35 is considered to be a disclaimer of the subject matter of the count and entry of adverse
judgment against Knapp at this time is appropriate. 37 CFR § 1.662(a).
Order
It is
ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1, the only count in this interference, is awarded
against junior party, BRADLEY J. KNAPP, FRED M. KIMOCK, RUDOLPH HUGO PETRMICHL
and NORMAN DONALD GALVIN;
FURTHER ORDERED that junior party, BRADLEY J. KNAPP, FRED M. KIMOCK,
RUDOLPH HUGO PETRMICHL and NORMAN DONALD GALVIN, is not entitled to a patent
containing claim 35 (corresponding to Count 1) of Application 09/048,016, filed March 25, 1998;
FURTHER ORDERED that the file of Patent 5,616,179 be transmitted to the appropriate PTO
official for entry of a Certificate of Correction adding Bradley J. Knapp and Fred M. Kimock as additional
inventors;
FURTHER ORDERED that if there is a settlement agreement and it has not already been filed,
attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. § 135(c) and 37 CFR § 1.661; and
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007