Interference No. 105,136 Paper 62
Wang v. Imler Page 7
to Imler (Paper 32 at 14).3
19. Prior to its filing the authorized preliminary motion, the time came due for Wang
to file its case-in-chief on the issue of priority (Paper 22 at 3).
20. However, Wang did not timely file its case-in-chief.4
21. Imler was authorized to file a miscellaneous motion seeking judgment against
Wang on the basis that Wang had conceded priority (Paper 38 at 2).
22. Imler filed its miscellaneous motion 1 on 9 January 2004 (Paper 39).
23. In addition to seeking immediate judgment against Wang, Imler requested that
Wang not be permitted to file any preliminary motion under 37 CFR § 1.633(a)
attacking the patentability of the '007 corresponding claims (Paper 39
at 10, n. 5).
24. Wang filed an opposition to the Imler miscellaneous motion (Paper 46) and Imler
replied (Paper 49).
25. On 16 January 2004, Wang filed its preliminary motion 1 under 37 CFR
§ 1.633(a) seeking judgment that Imler's '007 corresponding claims are
unpatentable (Paper 40).
3 Imler requested reconsideration of the portion of the decision allowing
Wang to attack the patentability of the '007 claims. (Paper 38) However, the decision
was not modified. (Paper 41 at 7).
4 During a conference call on 22 December 2003, Wang confirmed that it
had not filed its priority case-in-chief within the time set (Paper 37 at 1).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007