Interference No. 104,795 Paper 9
Eek v. McColm Page 2
ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1 (Paper 1, page 5), the sole
count in the interference, is awarded against senior party ANDREW ALEXANDER
McCOLM.
FURTHER ORDERED that senior party ANDREW ALEXANDER McCOLM is not
entitled to patent containing claims 15 and 16 (corresponding to Count 1) of U.S.
application 08/924,669, filed September 5, 1997, as a continuation of U.S. Patent
5,668,130, issued September 16, 1997, based on U.S. application 08/462,583, filed
June 5, 1995 as a continuation of U.S. application 08/357,223, filed December 12, 1994
as a continuation of U.S. application 07/946,576, filed September 18, 1992, which
claimed foreign priority to GB patent application 9120131.9, filed September 20, 1991;
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this paper shall be made of record in files of
U.S. application 08/924,669 and of U.S. Patent 5,633,244: 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
RICHARD TORCZON ) APPEALS AND
)) INTERFERENCES
Administrative Patent Judge
)
)
)
________________________ )
CAROL A. SPIEGEL )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Page: Previous 1 2 3 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007