U.S. Patent 5,942,871); and U.S. Patent Application No. 08/221,375, filed April 1, 1994 (now
U.S. Patent 5,528,118) with regard to Count 1. Since van Engelen has failed to allege a date that
is earlier than the date accorded Lee at the time the interference was declared, and since van
Engelen's motion attacking the benefit accorded Lee is denied, judgment will be entered against
van Engelen. Accordingly, it is not necessary to determine if Lee should be accorded benefit of
the above named applications. Lee preliminary motion 4 is dismissed.
Lee preliminaa motion 7
In its preliminary motion 7, Lee proposes to add claims 9-18 to its application and to
designate those claims as corresponding to count 1. Lee preliminary motion 7 is contingent upon the
granting of either one of van Engelen preliminary motions 2 or 5. Since neither van Engelen
preliminary motions 2 or 5 is granted, the contingency has not materialized. Accordingly, Lee
preliminary motion 7 is dismissed.
Lee preliminM motion 8
Lee moves to substitute new count I for existing count 1. The motion is contingent on
the granting of van Engelen preliminary motion 6. Since van Engelen preliminary motion 6 is
denied, the contingency has not materialized. Accordingly, Lee preliminary motion 8 is
dismissed.
Lee 12reliminM motion 9
Lee moves to be accorded benefit of certain of its prior applications for its proposed count
1. Since the proposed count I was not added to the interference, there is no occasion to decide
Lee preliminary motion 9. Accordingly, Lee preliminary motion 9 is dismissed.
-31 -
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007