Interference 103,781
date of Fischhoff’s U.S. Application 07/315,355, for subject
matter defined by Adang’s Proposed Substitute Count 2;
denying Fischhoff request under 37 CFR § 1.641(a)(Paper
No. 110) that the APJ exercise its discretion and notify the
parties that Claims 1-12 of Adang’s U.S. Patent 5,380,831, issued
January 10, 1995, appear to be unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph (best mode requirement), and set a time
period for the parties to take testimony and present related
evidence and argument;
dismissing Fischhoff’s motion under 37 CFR § 1.635 (Paper
No. 118) for an order temporarily staying the interference
proceeding under 37 CFR § 1.645(d) in anticipation of an
impending decision of the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of California “on a motion for summary judgment that the
claims of . . . Adang’s . . . U.S. Patent No. 5,380,831 are
invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(g) because of prior invention
by . . . Fischhoff . . .” (Paper No. 118, p. 2, para. I);
dismissing Fischhoff’s motion under 37 CFR § 1.635 (Paper
No. 127) for an order temporarily staying the interference
proceedings under 37 CFR § 1.645(d) pending a decision on appeal
to the Federal Circuit of a decision of the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of California on Monsanto’s motion for
summary judgment that claims of Adang’s U.S. Patent 5,380,831 are
-23-
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007