Interference No. 105,209
37 C.F.R. § 41. 204(a)(3). As Chapman has failed to file a priority statement overcoming
Rhoads accorded benefit date of April 25, 1996 or a showing of good cause as to why such a
deficiency should be excised, we enter judgment on priority against Chapman.
Upon consideration of the record, it is:
ORDERED that Junior Party Chapman claims 1-11 are unpatentable over prior art.
(Decision on Preliminary Motions, Paper No. 143).
FURTHER ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1 (Notice Declaring
Interference, Paper No. 1), the sole count in the interference, is awarded against Junior Party
Chapman.
FURTHER ORDERED that Junior Party Chapman is not entitled to a patent containing
claims 1-11 of U.S. Patent No. 6,216,228, which corresponds to Count 1 (Paper No. 1).
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this final decision shall be placed and given a
paper number in the file of Chapman, U.S. Patent No. 6,216,228 and Rhoads, U.S. Application
No. 10/118,849.
FURTHER ORDERED that if there is a settlement agreement, attention is directed to
35 U.S.C. § 135 (c).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007