Interference No. 105,252
Kuslich v. Hochschuler
ORDERED that judgment as to the subject matter of Count 1 is entered against senior
party STEPHEN HOCHSCHULER, WESLEY JOHNSON, KEVIN L. NICKELS, THOMAS R.
HEKTNER, LARRY WALES and TYLER LIPSCHULTZ;
FURTHER ORDERED that senior party STEPHEN HOCHSCHULER, WESLEY
JOHNSON, KEVIN L. NICKELS, THOMAS R. HEKTNER, LARRY WALES and TYLER
LIPSCHULTZ is not entitled to its patent claim 1 which corresponds to Count 1;
FURTHER ORDERED that judgment as to the subject matter of Count 2 is entered
against senior party STEPHEN HOCHSCHULER, WESLEY JOHNSON, KEVIN L. NICKELS,
THOMAS R. HEKTNER, LARRY WALES and TYLER LIPSCHULTZ;
FURTHER ORDERED that senior party STEPHEN HOCHSCHULER, WESLEY
JOHNSON, KEVIN L. NICKELS, THOMAS R. HEKTNER, LARRY WALES and TYLER
LIPSCHULTZ is not entitled to its patent claims 2 and 3 which correspond to Count 2;
FURTHER ORDERED that judgment as to the subject matter of Count 3 is entered
against senior party STEPHEN HOCHSCHULER, WESLEY JOHNSON, KEVIN L. NICKELS,
THOMAS R. HEKTNER, LARRY WALES and TYLER LIPSCHULTZ;
FURTHER ORDERED that senior party STEPHEN HOCHSCHULER, WESLEY
JOHNSON, KEVIN L. NICKELS, THOMAS R. HEKTNER, LARRY WALES and TYLER
LIPSCHULTZ is not entitled to its patent claims 4 and 5 which correspond to Count 3;
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.
April 11, 2005
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007