Interference No. 103,352
II. The Khokhar motion to disqualify counsel for Maeda
(Paper No. 36) relating to an alleged conflict of interest. (KB
20-24).
III. A purported resolution of a conflict in the "PCT/EPO."
(KB 24-26, 37-38).
IV. The prosecution history of the involved Maeda
application. (KB 26-29,38).
V. The Maeda motion to suppress evidence. (Paper No. 57).
VI. The Khokhar request to return the Maeda reply
associated with Maeda's motion to suppress. (Paper No. 62).
VII. Whether evidence adduced by Khokhar is sufficient to
establish a conception and actual reduction to practice of the
invention defined by the count prior to Maeda's effective filing
date of March 6, 1985.7
The party Khokhar has presented a record in the form of
declaration testimony, and also submitted documentary exhibits.
7Although Maeda's brief (page 1) makes passing reference to
a question of Khokhar's diligence with respect to a reduction to
practice, that particular question does not arise here since it
was not argued in Khokhar's brief and no evidence has been
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007