Interference No. 103,987
consideration of the belatedly filed motion for judgment is
DENIED.
Motion under 37 CFR § 1.633(a)
Normally, since the miscellaneous motion for
consideration of the belated motion for judgment has been
denied, we would simply dismiss the belated motion for
judgment. However, in this instance, the impact of the Gentry
decision on the senior party’s claims has been fully briefed.
Accordingly, for completeness, we will consider the junior
party’s motion for judgment. Additionally, our comments on
the motion for judgment shall serve as guidance to the APJ in
deciding the motions in the second interference.7
By way of background, Caveney discloses in his
specification the embodiment that provides a conductive trace
for reducing crosstalk for each adjacent signal pair of
7 Caveney is involved in the second interference with
the same application, which necessarily has the same
disclosure in question here.
11
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007