Interference No. 104,551 Paper No. 33
Barba v. Breakefield Page 2
FURTHER ORDERED that Barba is not entitled to a patent containing claims 1-9 of its
involved patent, which correspond to Count 1;
FURTHER ORDERED that, based on the record before us, senior party Breakefield is
entitled to a patent containing claim 38 of its involved application, which corresponds to
Count 1; and
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this decision be given a paper number and be
entered in the administrative record of Barba's involved patent and Breakefield's involved
application.
RICHARD TORCZON
Administrative Patent Judge
BOARD OF PATENT
APPEALS AND
CAROL A. SPIEGEL INTERFERENCES
Administrative Patent Judge
INTERFERENCE
TRIAL SECTION
SALLY GARDNER-LANE
Administrative Patent Judge
Notice: Any agreement or understanding between parties to this interference, including any collateral agreements
referred to therein, made in connection with or in contemplation of the termination of the interference, shall be in writing
and a true copy thereof filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office before termination of the interference as
between said parties to the agreement or understanding. 35 U.S.C. 135(c); 37 C.F.R. § 1.661.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007