1 common owner, Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. to investigate and determine the prior
2 inventors as between O’Sullivan and Kraatz. (Paper 34).
3 Syngenta has determined that O’Sullivan was the first to invent the subject
4 matter of the count and requests adverse judgment as regards to Kraatz. (Paper 38).
5 Upon consideration of the Request for Adverse Judgment, it is hereby:
6 ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1 the sole count in this
7 interference (Paper 1, page 4) is awarded against Senior Party Udo Kraatz.
8 FURTHER ORDERED that Senior Party Udo Kraatz is not entitled to a patent
9 containing Kraatz claim 1 (corresponding to Count 1).
10 FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this paper shall be made of record in files
11 of application 09/091,333 and patent 5,679,796.
12 FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall direct attention to 35 U.S.C. § 135(c)
13 and 37 CFR § 41.205(a) regarding the filing of settlement agreements.
14
15 /Sally Gardner Lane/ )
16 ADMINISTRATIVE PATENT JUDGE )
17 )
17
18 )
19 /Michael P. Tierney/ ) BOARD OF PATENT
20 ADMINISTRATIVE PATENT JUDGE ) APPEALS AND
21 ) INTERFERENCES
22 )
23 /James T. Moore/ )
24 ADMINISTRATIVE PATENT JUDGE )
25
26
27
28
29
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007