Interference No. 104,693 Preputnick v. Provencher Introduction Junior party Preputnick's preliminary statement does not allege a date of invention prior to senior party Provencher's accorded benefit date and junior party has not attacked senior party's accorded benefit date. Thus, Provencher's preliminary motions are moot and judgment as to the subject matter of the count will be entered against Preputnick. Preputnick, however, has filed three preliminary motions, each alleging unpatentability of all Provencher claims corresponding to the count. We exercise our discretion to take up these preliminary motions despite the absence of dispute on priority. Because all of Provencher's claims corresponding to the count are unpatentable over prior art, judgment as to the subject matter of the count will also be entered against Provencher. Findincrs of Fact 1. This interference was declared on April 30, 2001. 2. Junior party Preputnick is involved on the basis of its Patent No. 5,795,191, based on application 08/882,795, filed on June 26, 1997. 3. Senior party Provencher is involved on the basis of its application 09/225,439, filed January 5, 1999. - 2 -Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007