1. Introduction
Deen has filed a paper entitled "DEEN RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE"
("the Response") (Paper 65). Deen argues that "judgment should not be entered against it
because the decision on preliminary motions ("the decision") (Paper 62) is in error and should be
reversed" (Paper 65 at 2). Thus, Deen's response to the order to show cause (Paper 64) is, in
effect, a request for reconsideration of our decision on preliminary motions. We GRANT the
request for reconsideration to the extent that we have considered the arguments raised by Deen in
the response. However, we do not modify the decision.
11. Discussion
A. Request for reconsideration
When seeking reconsideration of a panel decision at final hearing (37 CFR § 1.655(a)), a
party should specify what points the panel overlooked or misapprehended in rendering the
decision. Charlton v. Rosenstein, http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/dcom/bpai/its/104148.pdf,
6-7, (BPAI (ITS) 2000).
Deen argues that there are two points where the decision is in error. In particular, Deen
argues that:
(1) The decision failed to recognize that Deen's proposed count "provides a better
basis for deciding priority in that it is broader than the existing count" and "is better supported by
Deen's best proofs, namely its provisional application" (Paper 65 at 2), and
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007