NEDELK V. STIMSON et al. - Page 53



            Interference No. 102,755                                                                   


            statement.  The belated motion includes a section entitled                                 
            "V. GOOD CAUSE SHOWING FOR BELATED MOTION UNDER 37 C.F.R.                                  
            §1.635 PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. §1.655(b) [sic, §1.645(b)],"                                  
            which gives several reasons for the belatedness.  The reason                               
            offered to explain the initial part of the delay is that "the                              
            pertinent dates of the on-sale bar and other activities that                               
            support the bar were not known to Junior Party Nedelk until                                
            after the Preliminary Statements were opened and analyzed."                                
            (Motion at 6.)  The APJ held,  and Stimson does not dispute,46                                                      
            that this constitutes good cause for the delay up to about                                 
            December 20, 1993, when Nedelk received and opened copies of                               
            Stimson's corrected preliminary statement and the accompanying                             
            Wells affidavit and exhibits thereto.                                                      
                        Nedelk seeks to excuse the last seven months of                                
            delay between December 20, 1993, and July 21, 1994, for the                                
            following reasons:                                                                         
                        [B]ecause efforts to resolve this                                              
                        interference without filing additional,                                        
                        substantive motions have been ongoing, and                                     
                        in the interest of economy, the subject                                        
                        Motion was not filed immediately upon                                          
                        discovery of the pertinent dates.  Indeed,                                     
                        Junior Party Nedelk has only recently                                          
                        become fully aware of certain facts set                                        
                        forth hereinabove through information                                          
                        obtained during exploration of settlement                                      

              Paper No. 57, at 3.46                                                                                   
                                               - 51 -                                                  



Page:  Previous  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007