Interference No. 103,635
fluoride for further reaction in the presence of trichloroethylene.
The claims of the parties which correspond to this count are:
Scott et al. : claims 1-126
Koyama et al. : claim 7
The parties filed the following briefs and reply briefs:
SB7 Scott brief, filed October 29, 1997 (paper no. 86)
KB Koyama brief, filed December 12, 1997 (paper no. 90)
SRB Scott Reply Brief, filed January 26, 1998 (paper no. 99).
Koyama filed a Record (paper no. 91, filed December 12, 1997) and Exhibits
(paper no. 93, filed December 12, 1997). Scott filed a record with Testimony (paper no.
92, filed December 12, 1997) and Exhibits (paper no. 94, filed December 12, 1997). Both
parties appeared at final hearing represented by counsel.
ISSUES
No issue of no interference-in-fact was raised in the briefs at final hearing.
The issues presented for our decision include Scott's motion8, the parties cases for
6 The Scott claims corresponding to the count originally included claim 13 (paper no. 1) but it was later
disclaimed (paper no. 33). Scott et al.'s disclaimer of claim 13 was acknowledged in the Decision on
Motions (paper no. 47).
7 Hereinafter, the briefs and reply briefs will be designated by these abbreviations followed by page number.
8 Koyama filed no preliminary motions. Scott filed five preliminary motions during the motion period:
1. under § 1.633(a) for judgment against Koyama for failing to satisfy the best mode requirement of 35
U.S.C. § 112 (paper no. 22);
2. under § 1.633(a) for judgment against Koyama for failing to satisfy the enablement requirement of 35
U.S.C. § 112 (paper no. 26);
3. under § 1.633(b) for judgment on the grounds that there is no interference-in-fact (paper no. 23);
4. under § 1.633(f) to be accorded the benefit of GB No. 90 07029.3, filed March 29, 1990 (paper no. 25);
5. under § 1.633(c ) to have Scott patent claims 1-12 designated as not corresponding to the Count
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007