1 3. At the time the interference was declared, a
2 maintenance fee due on the Stern U.S. Patent sought to be
3 reissued had not been timely paid.
4 4. The "provisional" nature of the interference was
5 based on the fact that the Stern reissue application "involved"
6 in the interference sought to reissue a patent which had expired
7 and hence the reissue application might not be able to be
8 regarded as a pending application within the meaning of 35 U.S.C.
9 § 135(a).
10 5. During the course of the interference, Stern was
11 authorized to file a miscellaneous motion seeking to have the PTO
12 accept a late payment of the maintenance fee.
13 6. Stern timely filed the miscellaneous motion and it
14 has been granted.
15 7. Upon the granting of the miscellaneous motion the
16 reissue application can be regarded as a "pending" application.
17 8. Since the reissue application is "pending", the
18 "provisional" nature of the interference was removed.
19 9. Stern now indicates that it "abandons" the reissue
20 application and requests entry of an adverse judgment.
21 10. Stern's request for entry of an adverse judgment
22 is granted.
23 B. Order
24 Upon consideration of a paper styled STERN EXPRESS
25 ABANDONMENT AND CONCESSION OF PRIORITY OF REISSUE APPLICATION
26 09/930,433, it is
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007