Interference No. 105,024
Pyne v. Harlan
FURTHER ORDERED that if there is a settlement agreement, the parties should note
the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 135(c) and 37 CFR § 1.666; and
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this judgment be filed in the respective involved
application or patent of the parties.
Richard E. Schafer
Administrative Patent Judge
BOARD OF PATENT
w
eson Lee APPEALS
6kdministrative Patent Judge AND
INTERFERENCES
chard Torczon
Administrative Patent Judgt /1)
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007