Interference No. 105,295
Weinblatt v. Aijala
1 Junior party Weinblatt filed no priority statement and also no priority motion. The
2 inaction is regarded as a concession of priority, which under 37 CFR § 41.127(b)(3) is further
3 construed as a request for entry of adverse judgment on priority. The request is granted.
4 It is
5 ORDERED that judgment as to the subject matter of Count 1 is herein entered against
6 junior party LEE S. WEINBLATT;
7 FURTHER ORDERED that junior party LEE S. WEINBLATT is not entitled to its
8 involved patent claims 1-16 which correspond to Count 1;
9 FURTHER ORDERED that if there is a settlement agreement, the parties should note
10 the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 135(c) and Bd. Rule 205;
11 FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this judgment be filed in the respective involved
12 application or patent of the parties.
13
14 /ss/ William F. Pate, III )
15 WILLIAM F. PATE, III )
16 Administrative Patent Judge )
17 )
18 )
19 )
20 /ss/ Jameson Lee ) BOARD OF PATENT
21 JAMESON LEE ) APPEALS
22 Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
23 ) INTERFERENCES
24 )
25 )
26 /ss/ Sally C. Medley )
27 SALLY C. MEDLEY )
28 Administrative Patent Judge )
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007