13, 14, and 17-24 and any one of Moore’s involved claims 1-10.
Sundholm was authorized to cancel its claim 12 and Moore and
Sundholm were authorized to file a joint preliminary motion for
no interference-in-fact (Paper 77). Sundholm’s unopposed
miscellaneous motion to cancel its claim 12 was granted (Paper
79). On 6 May 2002, Moore and Sundholm filed a paper for no
interference-in-fact between the remaining Sundholm claims 6, 10,
13, 14 and 17-24 and all of Moore’s claims 1-10 (Paper 80). A
decision on the joint preliminary motion for no interference-in-
fact is now before us.
B. Findings of fact
The record supports the following findings, and any
additional findings made throughout the opinion, by at least a
preponderance of the evidence.
1. Moore is involved on the basis of patent 6,024,175,
granted 15 February 2000, based on application 09/062,242, filed
17 April 1998.
2. Sundholm is involved on the basis of application
09/367,972, filed 7 September 1999.
3. Sundholm has been accorded benefit for the purpose of
priority of application PCT/FI99/00007, filed 7 January 1999.
4. Sundholm has been accorded benefit for the purpose of
priority of Finnish application 980034, filed 9 January 1998.
5. Sundholm real party in interest is Goran Sundholm
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007