Interference No. 104,703
Page No. 17
As noted above, contingent upon the grant of the various preliminary motions, Goodall
has requested adverse judgment as to proposed Counts B and C. (Goodall Response 1, Paper No.
39). To obviate a future interference between Goodall and Suwa arising from their involved
specifications description of MA copolymers, we grant Goodall Preliminary Motion 1.
G. Goodall Preliminary Motion 2
Goodall moves to have Goodall claims 2, 4, 5 and 7-11 designated as not corresponding
to any existing or proposed count in this interference. (Goodall Preliminary Motion 2, Paper No.
44). According to Goodall, Goodall claims 2, 4, 5 and 7-11 are directed to a separate patentable
invention from Counts A, B and C. Suwa does not dispute this allegation. (Paper No. 44, p. 11).
Goodall states that Goodall claims 2, 4 and 5 are directed to polymer compositions
containing a polymer formed by addition polymerization wherein the polymer has a pendant
perfluorophenyl group on at least one terminal end. (Paper No. 44, p. 6, ¶ 9). Goodall argues
that none of Count A, B or C recites an addition polymer having a pendant perfluorophenyl group
on at least one terminal end. According to Goodall, the presence of the pendant perfluorophenyl
group on at least one terminal end is an indication that the polymer has been formed in the
presence of the nickel-based catalyst EnNi(C6F5)2 (where E represents a neutral 2 electron ligand
donor and C6F5 represents perfluorophenyl) or in the presence of a catalyst formed from the
combination nickel ethylhexanoate, tris(perfluorophenyl)boron and triethylaluminum. (Paper
No. 44, pages 11-12).
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007