Interference No. 105,313
Tomita v. Godil
6. Junior party applicant Tomita has been accorded the benefit of the earlier filing date
of Application 09/802,619, filed March 8, 2001.
7. Senior party patentee Godil has not been accorded the benefit of the filing date of
any earlier filed applications.
8. When junior party applicant Tomita first requested the declaration of an interference
with Patent No. 6,169,624, 37 CFR § 1.608(b) was in effect, which required a showing by
Tomita of why it is entitled to priority relative to the patentee. The same showing requirement
now appears in new Board Rule 202(d), i.e., 37 CFR § 41.202(d), effective September 13, 2004.
9. When filed, junior party Tomita’s involved application named five inventors, Akira
Tomita, David Amm, Michael Daneman, Jim Hunter, and Bryan Staker. Upon petition, the
named inventorship of junior party’s involved application was corrected to delete the name of
Jim Hunter as a co-inventor. See Paper No. 10 of Tomita’s involved application.
10. Junior party applicant Tomita’ Rule 608(b) showing of priority consists of the
declaration testimony of each of the four inventors, together with Exhibits A, B, and C, and the
declaration testimony of non-inventor Jim Hunter.
11. Party Tomita’s Rule 608(b) showing alleges and attempts to establish prior actual
reduction to practice of the invention of the count, prior to senior party Godil’s filing date.
12. Concurrent with the declaration of this interference, junior party Tomita was placed
under an order to show cause (Paper No. 3) why judgment should not be entered against the
junior party on the ground that the junior party has not satisfied the requirement under
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007