BERKA et al. V. BERKA et al. V. BOEL et al. - Page 1

                                                                                                   Paper 55                       
               Filed by: Trial Section Merits Panel                                                                               
               Mail Stop Interference                                                                                             
               P.O. Box 1450                                                                                                      
               Alexandria VA 22313-1450                                                                                           
               Tel: 571-272-9797                                                                                                  
               Fax: 571-273-0042                                                                                                  
                                 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                        
                                       BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                         
                                                    AND INTERFERENCES                                                             
                                            ESPER BOEL, TOVE CHRISTENSEN                                                          
                                                   and HELLE F. WOLDIKE                                                           
                                                          Junior Party                                                            
                                                 (Application No. 08/435,557),                                                    
                                          RANDY M. BERKA, DANIEL CULLEN,                                                          
                                          GREGORY L. GRAY, KIRK J. HAYENGA                                                        
                                                    and VIRGIL B. LAWLIS                                                          
                                                          Senior Party                                                            
                                            (Patent Nos. 5,364,770 and 5,578,463).                                                
                                                Patent Interference No. 105,205                                                   
                                                   JUDGMENT - RULE 127                                                            

               Before: W. SMITH, LANE and POTEATE, Administrative Patent Judges.1                                                 
               POTEATE, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                              
                      In an interference, “priority of invention is awarded to the first party to reduce the                      
               invention to practice unless the other party can show it was the first to conceive of the invention                
               and that it exercised reasonable diligence in later reducing the invention to practice.”  Hitzeman                 
               v. Rutter, 243 F.3d 1345, 1353, 58 USPQ2d 1161, 1166 (Fed. Cir. 2001).  Boel’s earliest                            
               accorded priority benefit date is March 17, 1986, the filing date of its Danish Patent Application                 

                      1As part of Board efforts under the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, signatures on papers              
               originating from the Board are being phased out in favor of a completely electronic record.  Consequently,         
               subsequent papers in this case originating at the Board will not have signatures.  The signature requirements for the
               parties have not changed.  See, e.g., 37 C.F.R.  10.18.                                                           

Page:  1  2  3  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007