Interference No. 102,755
question of whether the parties' affidavits, which were filed
subsequent to the motion, prove either the existence of the
alleged agreement or Nedelk's belief in the existence of such
an agreement.
D. Judgment
For the foregoing reasons, judgment on the issue of
priority is hereby entered against Nedelk's patent claims that
correspond to the count, i.e., claims 1-11, which means Nedelk
is not entitled to a patent containing those claims. Judgment
is
- 60 -
Page: Previous 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007