Interference No. 104,192
Cragg v. Martin v. Fogarty
contexts and requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 119 and 35 U.S.C. §
120 are different. That Michael D. Dake being a sole inventor
for the subject matter of the count is not a problem under 35
U.S.C.
§ 120 with respect to earlier filed United States applications
does not mean Cragg can expect that it should also not be a
problem insofar as benefit to foreign applications are
concerned. Satisfaction of requirements under 35 U.S.C. § 120
entitles a party only to the earlier filing date of a
previously filed United States application, not a foreign
application.
- 24 -
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007