Part B. Relevant discussion during conference call
The conference call was initiated by counsel for DeBonte for the purpose of discussing
DeBonte’s Request for Entry of Judgment against DeBonte. Adverse judgment is requested on
the basis that DeBonte’s involved claims (claims 20-72) are not patentable to DeBonte under 35
U.S.C. § 135(b) (Paper 52). Debonte’s request for entry of adverse judgment is an abandonment
of the contest as to the counts. 37 CFR 1.662(a). It is appropriate, therefore, to enter adverse
judgment against DeBonte.
During the conference call, the Order relating to Sernyk’s requests for
discovery/testimony (Paper 41) was discussed and it was noted that DeBonte’s/Cargill’s answers
to Sernyk’s discovery requests are due on April 30, 2004 and that the deposition of Willie H.T.
Loh is scheduled to take place next month. Sernyk asks that entry of adverse judgment be
deferred until after discovery is complete. In light of DeBonte’s abandonment of the contest, we
see no reason to continue discovery into matters related to the issues raised in this interference.
Part C. Order
Upon consideration of DeBonte’s Request for Entry of Judgment and Sernyk’s Response
thereto (Paper 53) and in view of the above, it is hereby:
ORDERED that senior party Lorin R. DeBonte is not entitled to a patent containing
claims 20-72 of Application 10/034,698.
FURTHER ORDERED that the Order directing DeBonte and Cargill to respond to
Sernyk’s discovery requests and authorizing Sernyk to take the testimony of Willie H.T. Loh
(Paper 41), is vacated.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007