Interference No. 105,135 Paper 90
Scripps Research Inst. v. Genentech, Inc. Page 2
unpatentable (Paper 83). The parties were authorized (Paper 87) to file a response to
Paper 89, but in view of the limited nature of the comment, the authorization is
withdrawn as moot.
DECIDED that judgment on priority be entered against Scripps for the subject
matter of the count;
FURTHER DECIDED that Scripps' patent claims 1 and 2 be canceled;
FURTHER DECIDED that Genentech's 08/437,989 application claims 22 and 39
be held unpatentable; and
FURTHER DECIDED that a copy of this decision be entered in the administrative
records of Genentech's 08/437,989 and 08/444,934 applications and Scripps' 5,622,931
patent.
cc (via electronic mail):
For Scripps Research Institute: Talivaldis Cepuritis and Dolores T. Kenney, OLSON &
HIERL, LTD. of Chicago, Illinois.
For Genentech, Inc.: R. Danny Huntington and Sharon E. Crane, BINGHAM
MCCUTCHEN LLP of Washington, D.C.
courtesy copy (via electronic mail):
For Nemerson: Patrea L. Pabst, PABST PATENT GROUP LLP of Atlanta, Georgia.
Notice: Agreements and understandings regarding the termination of an interference
are subject to filing requirements under 35 U.S.C. 135(c).
Notice: In the event of judicial review, note the requirements of Bd. R. 8(b).
Page: Previous 1 2
Last modified: November 3, 2007