Interference 103,781
(3) the parties to specify whether the time for filing
preliminary motions should be extended;
(4) the parties to specify what additional preliminary
motions, if any, and supporting evidence, if any, need be filed
in this newly declared interference;
(5) the parties to explain why the additional preliminary
motions and supporting evidence specified are necessary to, and
should be filed in, this interference proceeding, and
(6) the parties to recommend time periods for filing the
specified additional preliminary motions, supporting evidence,
oppositions, replies, motions to suppress evidence, etc.
November 26, 2002 - Adang filed a REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION and RESPONSES RE: THE DECISION ON MOTIONS AND
REQUEST (Paper No. 154):
I. alternatively asking the Board to:
require Monsanto to elect the first to invent the subject
matter defined by Count 2 as between Barton and Fischhoff;
remand the Barton and Fischhoff applications to a primary
examiner to require identification of Fischhoff or Barton as the
first to invent the subject matter defined by Count 2 under
37 CFR § 1.78(c); or
declare separate interferences, i.e., Fischhoff v. Adang and
Barton v. Adang;
-25-
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007