1 has a patent or application in the interference is construed to be a request for adverse judgment.
2 It is:
3 ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1, the sole count in interference, is
4 awarded against Junior Party Chien.
5 FURTHER ORDERED that Junior Party Chien is not entitled to a patent containing
6 claims 21, 23-31 and 33-37 of Chien’s abandoned U.S. Application No. 09/093,803, all of which
7 correspond to Count 1.
8 FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this paper shall be made of record in the files of
9 U.S. Application No. 09/093,803 and U.S. Patent No. 5,330,893.
10 FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. §135(c) and
11 37 Bd. R. 205.
12 /Sally Gardener Lane/ )
13 SALLY GARDNER LANE )
14 Administrative Patent Judge )
15 )
16 /Michael P. Tierney ) BOARD OF PATENT
17 MICHAEL P. TIERNEY ) APPEALS AND
18 Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
19 )
20 /James T. Moore/ )
21 JAMES T. MOORE )
22 Administrative Patent Judge )
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007