Interference 105,233 Paper 23
Within the settlement agreement enclosed with Paper 21 the following paragraph
appears:
2. Priority Junior Party concedes priority with respect to the patent claims in Senior
Party’s Application over Junior Party’s Patent. In other words, Junior Party concedes
that priority of invention is to be granted to Senior Party’s Application over Junior
Party’s Patent. Junior Party’s concession is limited to the patent claims subject to the
Interference Proceeding, which patent claims are claims 1-28 of Junior Party’s Patent.
This paragraph is construed by the Board to be a request for adverse judgment pursuant
to 37 CFR §41.127(b)(3) [formerly 37 CFR §1.662(a)]. Accordingly, the request for adverse
judgment is GRANTED.
Two other issues arise from the filing of this document.
First, the parties should be aware of the provisions of 37 CFR §41.205(c) [formerly 37
CFR §1.666(b)] pertaining to settlement agreements and requests to keep separate from the
interference file. As the agreement forms an integral part of the “joint request” in this instance,
it shall be maintained as part of the interference file.
Second, the quoted paragraph 2 above does not negate the effects of 37 CFR §41.127
[formerly 37 CFR §1.658(c)] regarding interference estoppel.
It is hereby:
ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1 (Paper 1, page 5), the only count in
the interference, is awarded against junior party ROBERT KAUFMAN, GARY C. DOWNES,
and DANIEL J. GRAMAROSSA.
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007