Interference 103,579
No. 22) and 7 (VPM 7)(Paper No. 23) to redefine the
interfering subject matter by substituting proposed
Count V-1 for Count 1 and to be accorded benefit of
the filing dates of Visser’s grandparent application,
filed December 1, 1993, and Visser’s parent application,
filed February 14, 1992, for proposed Count V-1, both
motions contingent upon denial of Visser’s Preliminary
Motions 1-5, were dismissed because Visser’s Preliminary
Motion 4 (Paper No. 20) was granted (Paper No. 74, p. 13).
(11) Hofvander’s Preliminary Motion 6 (HPM 6)(Paper
No. 66) for inter partes testing of the parties’ starches
by an independent laboratory was denied “for the reasons
stated by Visser” (Paper No. 74, p. 13).
January 29, 1997 – The interference was redeclared with
corrected Proposed Count H-1 (new Count 2) substituted for
existing Count 1 (Paper No 83). The interference was redeclared
with new Count 2 as follows (Paper No. 83 (VR vii; HR viii)):
COUNT 2
A homologous construct of the potato plant comprising
a full length potato granule-bound starch synthase (PGBSS)
cDNA or genomic DNA
or
an antisense construct for inhibiting expression of the gene
for granule-bound starch synthase in potato, comprising
-15-
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007