0 0
The opinion in support of the decision is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper 22
Filed by: Interference Trial Section Merits Panel
Box Interference Filed:
Washington, D.C. 20231 30 March 2004
Tel: 703-308-9797
Fax: 703-305-0942
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEAL MAILED
AND INTERFERENCES
MAR 3 0 2004
REDOX TECHNOLOGIES, INC., PAT. & T.M. OFFICE
Junior Party, BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
(U.S. Application 08/567,564), AND INTERFERENCES
V.
DANIEL B, POURREAU, HAVEN S. KESLING, JR.
FRANK J. LIOTTA, JR. and JEFFREY M. McFARLAND
Senior Party
(U.S. Patent 5,371,298).
Patent Interference No. 105,011
Before: McKELVEY, Senior Administrative Patent Judge, and SCHAFER and TORCZON,
Administrative Patent Judges.
SCHAFER, Administrative Patent Judg
JUDGMENT - RULE 640
A panel of the Board has issued a decision holding all of the parties' involved claims
unpatentable over prior art. Paper 21. Without any patentable claims there is no basis upon which
to form a count suitable for determining priority and, therefore, no basis for proceeding to the
priority phase of the interference. Accordingly, it is appropriate to enter judgment against both
parties at this time.
Page: 1 2 3 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007