Interference No. 105,024
Pyne v. Harlan
The extended due date for senior party Harlan to respond to a show cause order against
the senior party, issued on November 5, 2002 (Paper No. 14), has passed without the filing of any
proper response from the senior party which places the senior party in compliance with all
outstanding requirements in this interference. In a telephone conference call with the
administrative patent judge on November 21, 2002, Mr. Edward J. Keeling of the law firm of
Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP confirmed that the senior party has not filed a response
subsequent to the Administrative Patent Judge's communication dated November 13, 2002,
which extended the due date for a response to the show cause order to November 19, 2002.
Accordingly, it is now appropriate to cmerjudgment under 37 CFR § 1.662(a) against the senior
party for failure to prosecute the interference.
It is
ORDERED that judgment as to the subject matter of Count I is hereby entered against
senior party JIM HARLAN and HENRY E. THOMAS, Jr.;
FURTHER ORDERED that judgment as to the subject matter of Count 2 is hereby
entered against senior party JIM HARLAN and HENRY E. THOMAS, Jr.;
FURTHER ORDERED that senior party JIM HARLAN and HENRY E. THOMAS, Jr.
is not entitled to its application claim 15 which corresponds to Count 1;
FURTHER ORDERED that senior party JIM HARLAN and HENRY E. THOMAS, Jr.
is not entitled to its application claims 16-20 which correspond to Count 2;
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007