relating to a possible license agreement" and may be required to
file the agreement before termination of the interference. 37
CFR §1.666(a). Note that after final decision by the Board, the
interference is considered terminated when no appeal (35 USC
§141) or other review (35 USC §146) has been or can be taken or
had. 37 CFR §1.661.
A delay in the judgment is not consistent with securing the
just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of the interference.
37 CFR §1.601. Furthermore, a delay in the judgment may extend
the patent term of any patent that issues on Boon’s application.
37 CFR §1.701(a)(1). In the present instance, a term extension
would not appear to be in the public interest.
Upon consideration of the record of the interference, it is
ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1, the
sole count in the interference, is awarded against junior party
RALPH T. KUBO, HOWARD M. GREY, ALESSANDRO SETTE, and ESTEBAN
CELIS;
FURTHER ORDERED that junior party, RALPH T. KUBO,
HOWARD M. GREY, ALESSANDRO SETTE, and ESTEBAN CELIS, is not
entitled to a patent containing claims 13 and 14 of patent
5,662,907, which correspond to Count 1;
FURTHER ORDERED that Boon’s request for delay of
judgment in the interference is DENIED;
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this decision be given
a paper number and be entered in the administrative records of
Kubo's 08/186,266 application and Boon's 08/571,263 application.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007