SCOTT et al. V. SCOTT - Page 2




                Application, 29/088,643. Pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.662(a), the abandonment of an involved                        
                application is treated as a request f or entry of an adverse judgment. Accordingly , it is                    
                       ORDERED that judgment on priority as to the subject matter of Count I (Paperlp.5),is                   
                awarded against the junior party Robin Scott;                                                                 
                       FURTHER ORDERED that ROBIN SCOTT, WILLIAM R. DAWS and KAZUNOBU                                         
                NAKAMURA are entitled to a patent containing the sole claim (corresponding to Count 1) of                     
                Design Application 29/083,820 (subject to any further ex parte examination);                                  
                       FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this judgment be made of record in Application                          
                29/083,820 and in Application 29/088,643; and                                                                 
                       FURTHER ORDERED that if there is a settlement agreement which has not been filed,                      
                attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. § 135(c) and 37 CFR § 1.661.                                               




                                      RICHARD E. SCHAFER                                                                      
                                      Administrative Patent Judge                                                             

                                                                                  BOARD OF PATENT                             
                                                                                             AND                              
                                     f J IffSON.LEE APPEALS                                                                   
                                        dmimstrative Patent Judge INTERFERENCES                                               


                                      MICHAEL P. TIERNEY                                                                      
                                      Administrative Patent Judge                                                             










                                                               2                                                              







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007