1 no reason to address the Dawson request. Furthermore, the request is
2 actually a motion for some sort of clarification. As a motion, the request
3 fails to comply with the rules and Standing Order for all the reasons set out
4 in Paragraph (2), supra. We decline to further address the request.
5 (5)
6 Dallavalle "additional discovery" list sets forth some information that
7 the Examiner may consider relevant in the examination of any reissue which
8 Dawson may file. The list should be provided by Dawson to the Examiner if
9 a reissue is filed. 37 C.F.R. § 1.56. In addition, Dawson should also provide
10 to the Examiner a copy of (1) the List of Specific Compounds (Paper 21),
11 filed by Dallavalle on 05 July 2007, and (2) the Statement of Structural
12 Formulas of 071 Patent Examples 1-22 (Paper 19) filed by Dawson on
13 03 July 2007. Both the List and Statement will be of considerable use to the
14 Examiner in examining any reissue. 37 C.F.R. § 1.56.
15 (6)
16 Finally, we reach the main event of the interference, priority of
17 invention. The Dawson motion to concede priority fails to comply with the
18 Standing Order because the motion is not numbered. Standing Order 121.1
19 (Paper 2, page 29). Because granting the motion ends the interference, we
20 will overlook Dawson's failure to comply with the Standing Order.
21 But, failure to comply with the Standing Order is not the only loose
22 end with the motion. Dawson not only concedes priority, but attempts to
23 make all sorts of reservations about what will or will not happen if a reissue
24 is filed.
25 For example, Dawson does not concede priority of any and all
26 compounds of the claims of its involved Patent 7,053,071. Likewise,
27 Dawson does not concede or agree that those compounds would have been
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013