Interference 103,685
1. Claims 1, 3-6, 8-12, 15-16, 18-19, 23-24, 26-29,
31-32, 35-36, 38-40, 43, 45-48 and 52 of Holsten’s involved
application are not unpatentable under the first paragraph
of 35 U.S.C. § 112 (Paper No. 83, p. 26).
2. Claims 1, 3-6, 8-12, 15-16, 18-19, 23-24, 26-29, 31-32,
35-36, 38-40, 43, 45-48 and 52 of Holsten’s involved
application are not unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101
based on any lack of utility (Paper No. 83, p. 26).
Riggins’ Preliminary Motion 2 (Paper No. 20) is denied
(Paper No. 83, p. 28).
Holsten’s claims corresponding to Count 1 do not
include subject matter shown to be unpatentable to Holsten
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph (Paper No. 83,
p. 28).
Riggins’ contingent Preliminary Motion 3 (Paper No. 21)
is dismissed (Paper No. 83, p. 29).
Holsten’s Preliminary Motion 1 (Paper No. 76) is
granted (Paper No. 83, p. 32).
Claims 65-68 of Riggins’ involved application are
unpatentable to Riggins (Paper No. 83, p. 32).
Riggins’ Preliminary Motion 7 (Paper No. 37) is granted
(Paper No. 83, p. 32).
-16-
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007