Patent Interference No. 103,892 Page 22
DISMISSED. Davie has failed to establish a date of priority prior to June 26, 1986.
Accordingly, as Grundmann (brief, p. 5) points out, “if Davie has failed to establish that it
is entitled to either of its alleged reductions to practice dates [which is the case],
Grundmann’s entitlement to its March 12, 1986 priority date is moot.” The dismissal of
this motion renders the Grundmann motion (see p. 1) to add claim 33 to the Grundmann
application moot.
c. Senior Party Grundmann’s Motion under 37 CFR § 1.635 to suppress evidence
(paper no. 40) and related thereto:
i. Junior Party Davie’s belated Motion under 37 CFR §§ 1.635 and 1.645(b) for
extension of time to file an opposition (paper no. 43); and,
ii. Junior Party Davie’s Motion to Strike (paper no. 66).
DISMISSED. Grundmann’s motion to suppress seeks to suppress Davie exhibits 1,
2, 6, 7, 9, and 11, “to the extent that these exhibits are relied upon to show the date of
receipt by the periodical Biochemistry of manuscripts submitted by Davie.” P. 1. The
date of receipt by the periodical Biochemistry of manuscripts submitted by Davie is not
an issue we must address to reach a decision in this interference. Irrespective of when
the manuscripts were received by the periodical Biochemistry, the final published
articles do not establish Davie’s contention that it was first to actually reduce the
invention to practice. Davie’s motions in response to Grundmann’s motion to suppress
thus are also DISMISSED.
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007