Ex Parte Kain - Page 2




                  Interference No.  105,236                                                                                                                     
                  Cone v.  Kain                                                                                                                                 
                            On October 29, 2004, party Kain gave notice (Paper 42) to the board that the real party in                                          
                  interest of both junior party’s involved patent and senior party’s involved application are now                                               
                  the same, Cosco Management, Inc.  On November 3, 2004, the common assignee, Cosco                                                             
                  Management Inc., filed a request for entry of adverse judgment (Paper 44) against senior party                                                
                  Kain.  The request is granted.  It is                                                                                                         
                            ORDERED that judgment as to the subject matter of Count 1 is herein entered against                                                 
                  senior party JAMES M.  KAIN;                                                                                                                  
                            FURTHER ORDERED that senior party JAMES M.  KAIN is not entitled to its                                                             
                  application claims 41-51 which correspond to Count 1;                                                                                         
                            FURTHER ORDERED that junior party Cone’s priority brief (Paper 31), insofar as it is                                                
                  regarded as a motion for priority, is dismissed as moot;                                                                                      
                            FURTHER ORDERED that if there is a settlement agreement, the parties should note                                                    
                  the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 135(c) and 41 CFR § 1.205; and                                                                                
                            FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this judgment be placed in the respective                                                            
                  involved application or patent of the parties.                                                                                                











                                                                             - 2 -                                                                              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007