Interference No. 103,891
Issues
The following issues have been raised by the parties in
their briefs:
a) the status of Concept S as prior art under either 35 U.S.C.
§§ 102(a) or 102(b);
b) the patentability of the claims of both parties over Concept S
if it is determined to be prior art;
c) the Flanders motion under 37 CFR § 1.634 to correct inventor-
ship;
d) the parties' respective cases for priority of invention;
raised in Flanders’ reply brief:
e) whether the embodiment relied on for Moorman’s priority proof
is within the scope of the count;
raised subsequent to Flanders’ reply brief:
f) the Moorman motion to strike portions of Flanders’ reply brief
or in the alternative permit filing of a Moorman surreply brief;
and:
g) certain papers filed after oral hearing.
Moorman’s Motion to Strike Portions of Flanders’ Reply Brief
Subsequent to the filing of Flanders' reply brief for
final hearing, Moorman filed a motion to strike portions of
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007