Interference No. 105,136 Paper 62 Wang v. Imler Page 2 Judgment-Rule 658 and Rule 659 I. Introduction Wang did not file its case-in-chief on priority within the time set by the Administrative Patent Judge ("APJ"). Wang has filed a preliminary motion attacking the patentability of certain Imler involved claims, but those claims have been cancelled by Imler. There being no further issues for the panel to resolve, judgment is entered against Wang on the issue of priority and against Imler as to the claims it has cancelled. II. Background The interference was declared on 16 July 2003 between junior party QING WANG, MITCHELL H. FINER and XIAO-CHI JIA ("Wang") and senior party JEAN-LUC IMLER, MAJID MEHTALI and ANDREA PAVIRANI ("Imler"). As stated by Imler (Paper 38, at 4, emphasis in original): ...the present interference was declared, for procedural and administrative purposes, after a complete preliminary motions phase in the '821[1 ] interference, when, as a result of the decisions on motions in the '821 interference, the Board held it appropriate to add Imler's claims 66 and 67 to the Imler '143 application. See Order at 3. The present interference was originally declared with claims 66 and 67 of the Imler '143 application. Paper 1 (Notice Declaring Interference) at 4. Claims 66 and 67, as added to the Imler '143 application, define two of the four alternatives of the count (the other two alternatives being directed to Wang's claims). See Paper 1, at 4. The present interference was subsequently redeclared so as to add certain claims of the Imler '007 application as being designated 1 Interference 104,821, which was declared on 8 March 2002. An order awarding judgment on priority against Imler was entered in the '821 interference on 16 July 2003 ('821, Paper 116 at 42). 2Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007