Forgyv.Solomon et al.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Nov 19, 2012

11201156 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 19, 2012)

BoxInterferences@uspto.gov Paper 103
Tel: 571-272-4683 Filed: 19 November 2012

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
_______________
TERRY FORGY
Junior Party
(Application No. 11/208,990),
v.
FRED L. SOLOMON and WILLIAM J. HARRINGTON
Senior Party
(Patent No. 7,621,101).
_______________
Patent Interference No. 105,795 (SCM)
(Technology Center 3600)
_______________

Before SALLY GARDNER LANE, SALLY C. MEDLEY, and SCOTT R.
BOALICK Administrative Patent Judges.

MEDLEY, Administrative Patent Judge.

Judgment – Bd.R. 127
Forgy has failed to prove priority of invention (Paper 102). Accordingly, it 1
is 2
ORDERED that judgment is entered against Forgy for Count 1 (Paper 1 3
at 3); 4
FURTHER ORDERED that claims 1-13, 21 and 23 of Forgy’s involved 5
application are FINALLY REFUSED, 35 U.S.C. 135(a); 6
FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall note the requirements of 1
35 U.S.C. § 135(c) and Bd.R. 205; and 2
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this judgment be entered in the 3
administrative records of the involved Forgy application and Solomon patent. 4
5
6
(cc via electronic mail): 7
8
Attorney for Forgy: 9
10
Delphine James, Esq. 11
The Law Office of Delphine James, PLLC 12
Email: dmjamesjd@aol.com 13
14
Attorney for Solomon: 15
16
Edward A. Pennington, Esq. 17
Chadwick A. Jackson, Esq. 18
Michael A. Schwartz, Esq. 19
Stephanie D. Scruggs, Esq. 20
Murphy & King, PC 21
Email: eap@murphyking.com 22
Email: caj@murphyking.com 23
Email: mxs@murphyking.com 24
Email: sds@murphyking.com 25