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 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007