deciding preliminary motions, a motions panel held that
Rosenstein reissue claim 74 was not patentable to Rosenstein
(Paper 127, pages 100-101 and associated findings). Accordingly,
Rosenstein reissue claim 74 has never been designated as
corresponding to a count in this interference.
Rosenstein reissue claim 74, however, is involved in
companion Interference 104,476, where it was designated as
corresponding to the Count 1 of Interference 104,476 at the time
it was declared. In accordance with a telephone conference call
with counsel, the issue of whether reissue claim 74 is patentable
to Rosenstein will be "transferred" to Interference 104,476,
where it is involved in an interference within the meaning of
35 U.S.C. § 135(a). During the telephone conference call,
counsel for Rosenstein indicated that it wished to preserve a
right to seek judicial review of the board's holding of
unpatentability of Rosenstein reissue claim 74. Accordingly, in
Interference 104,476, a final order will be entered in due course
(within one month) from which Rosenstein will be able to seek
judicial review from the board's holding that Rosenstein claim 74
is not patentable to Rosenstein.
Also discussed during the telephone conference call was
Rosenstein reissue claim 75. While not involved in this
interference, Rosenstein reissue claim 75 has been considered in
Interference 104,476. An order entering Rosenstein reissue
claim 75 in the Rosenstein reissue application will be entered in
Interference 104,476 in due course (within one month).
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007