BOX INTERFERENCE Paper 51
WASHINGTON DC 20231
703-308-9797
703-305-0942 (fax) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES
SUBHAS KUNDU,
VIVEK DESAI, and ANDREA CAMERON
(09/621,623),
Junior Party,
v.
NARAYAN RAGUNATHAN,
JAMES C. CHAO, ROBERT A. FEMIA, and MALCOLM S.F. ROSS
(6,028,065; 6,268,356; and 09/757,261),
Senior Party.
Interference No. 104,8431
HEARD: 21 August 2002
Before SCHAFER, LEE, and TORCZON, Administrative Patent Judges.
TORCZON, Administrative Patent Judge.
JUDGMENT
(PURSUANT TO 37 CFR §1.617)
INTRODUCTION
[01] Kundu filed its involved 09/621,623 [623] application after Ragunathan's 6,028,065 [065]
patent had issued and more than two years after Kundu alleges it had first reduced the
interfering subject matter to practice. An administrative patent judge entered an order
pursuant to Rule 6172 requiring Kundu to show cause why judgment should not enter
1 Related litigation: Pharmaceutical Resources, Inc. v. Alpharma USPD Inc., 02-CV-1015 (SDNY, McKenna,
J.).
2 Rules 37 C.F.R. part 1 are commonly known by section number alone. Hence, "Rule 617" refers to
"37 C.F.R. §1.617".
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007