Roth et al.v.Gierset et al.

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

May 11, 2007

08233002 (B.P.A.I. May. 11, 2007)

Paper 98

Filed: May 11, 2007
Mail Stop Interference
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Tel: 571-272-4683
Fax: 571-273-0042

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________________________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________________________

RUTH A. GJERSET, and ROBERT E. SOBOL
Junior Party
(Application 08/335,461),

v.

JACK A. ROTH, TOSHIYOSHI FUJIWARA,
ELIZABETH A. GRIMM, TAPAS MUKHOPADHYAY,
WEI-WEI ZHANG, and LAURIE B. OWEN-SCHAUB
Senior Party
(Patent 5,747,469).
________________________________

Patent Interference No. 105,377 (MPT)
________________________________

Before: ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON, SALLY GARDNER LANE, and
MICHAEL P. TIERNEY, Administrative Patent Judges.

TIERNEY, Administrative Patent Judge.

JUDGMENT - ADVERSE - Bd. R. 127(b)

Junior Party Gjerset has filed a request for adverse judgment. (Paper
95). Accordingly, judgment on priority is entered against Gjerset as to
Count 2, the sole count in interference. (Paper 73).
1
2
3
Patent Interference No. 105,377 Paper 98
Gjerset v. Roth Page 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
All pending motions are dismissed as moot in light of Gjerset’s
request for adverse judgment. In particular, Gjerset and Roth’s motions for
judgment on priority (Papers 88 and 91), Gjerset’s motion for priority
benefit of an earlier application (Paper 87) and Roth’s motion attacking
Gjerset’s patentability based on prior art (Paper 41) are dismissed as moot.

It is:
Ordered that judgment on priority as to Count 2, the sole count in
interference (Redeclaration, Paper 73, p. 2), is awarded against Gjerset.
Further Ordered that Gjerset is not entitled to a patent containing
claims 1, 2, 4-20, and 23 of its involved U.S. Application 08/335,461, all of
which correspond to Count 2.
Further Ordered that a copy of this paper shall be made of record in
the files of Gjerset, U.S. Application 08/335,461 and Roth, U.S. Patent
5,747,469.
Further Ordered that the parties’ attention is directed to 35 U.S.C.
§ 135(c) and Bd. R. 205.

/ss/ Adriene Lepiane Hanlon )
ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
/ss/ Sally Gardner Lane ) BOARD OF PATENT
SALLY GARDNER LANE ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
/ss/ Michael P. Tierney )
MICHAEL P. TIERNEY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Patent Interference No. 105,377 Paper 98
Gjerset v. Roth Page 3

cc (electronic filing):

Counsel for GJERSET:

Michael J. Wise, Esq.
PERKINS COIE LLP
1620 26th Street
6th Floor, South Tower
Santa Monica, CA 90404-4013
Email: mwise@perkinscoie.com
Email: kohriner@perkinscoie.com

Counsel for ROTH:

Steven L. Highlander, Esq.
FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI LLP
600 Congress Avenue
2400 One American Center
Austin, TX 78701
Email: shighlander@fulbright.com
Email: gshishima@fulbright.com