Further, we find it unnecessary to consider the specific
objections to the admissibility of Okajima’s exhibit OX9,
since Okajima has failed to make a prima facie case of
obviousness against Bourdeau’s claims even assuming OX9 to be
admissible.
Accordingly, Bourdeau’s motion to suppress is dismissed
as moot.
D. Judgment
Upon consideration of the record, it is
ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1, the sole
count in the interference, is awarded against junior party
SHINPEI OKAJIMA.
FURTHER ORDERED that junior party SHINPEI OKAJIMA is not
entitled to a patent containing claims 1-4, 6-11 and 21 of US
application 08/665,679, filed June 18, 1996, which correspond
to count 1.
FURTHER ORDERED that judgment is entered against BOURDEAU
with respect to its claim 17.
FURTHER ORDERED that BOURDEAU is not entitled to a patent
containing claim 17 of US application 08/676,928, filed July
8, 1996, which corresponds to count 1.
- 23 -
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007