Jazowski stated that it would be unable to demonstrate priority of invention with respect to the
Substitute Count 1 (See also Paper 75 at 26). The representation is a concession of priority and
is treated as a request for entry of adverse judgment against Jazowski. See 37 CFR § 1.662(a).
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Substitute Count 1 (Paper 77 at 2) is awarded
against junior party ROY E. JAZOWSKI and EDWARD H. DECKER.
FURTHER ORDERED that junior party ROY E. JAZOWSKI and EDWARD H.
DECKER is not entitled to a patent containing claims 25-27 (corresponding to Substitute Count
1) of application 09/730,476.
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this paper shall be made of record in files of
application 09/730,476 and U.S. Patent 6,168,447.
FURTHER ORDERED that if there is a settlement agreement, attention is directed to 35
U.S.C. § 135(c) and 37 CFR § 1.661.
______________________________)
JOHN C. MARTIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
______________________________)BOARD OF PATENT
JAMESON LEE ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
______________________________)
SALLY C. MEDLEY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Page: Previous 1 2 3 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007