Peak et al.v.Scarlato et al.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jan 7, 2013

10695499 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 7, 2013)

BoxInterferences@uspto.gov Paper 233
Telephone: 571-272-4863 Entered: 7 January 2013

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________________

Patent Interference 105,791 RPG
Technology Center 1600
____________________

IAN RICHARD ANSELM PEAK,
MICHAEL PAUL JENNINGS and E. RICHARD MOXON,

Application 12/841,457
Junior Party,

v.

VINCENZO SCARLATO,
VEGA MASIGNANI, RINO RAPPUOLI,
MARIAGRAZIA PIZZA, and GUIDO GRANDI,

Patent 7,714,121 B2,
Senior Party.

Before FRED E. McKELVEY, JONI Y. CHANG, and RAE LYNN P. GUEST,
Administrative Patent Judges.

McKELVEY, Administrative Patent Judge.

JUDGMENT
Upon consideration of the MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 1
Decision on Priority (Paper 232, entered concurrently herewith), it is 2
2

ORDERDED that judgment on priority as to Count 1 (the sole count 1
in the interference; Paper 1, page 4) is awarded against Junior Party [1] Ian Richard 2
Anselm Peak, [2] Michael Paul Jennings, [3] E. Richard Moxon, and [4] The 3
University of Queensland. 4
FURTHER ORDERED that the Junior Party is not entitled to a patent 5
containing claims 35 and 37-42 (corresponding to Count 1) of: 6
Peak application 7
12/841,457, filed 22 July 2010 8
FURTHER ORDERED that claims 35 and 37-42 of Peak application 9
12/841,457 are finally refused. 35 U.S.C. § 135(a). 10
FURTHER ORDERED that if there is a settlement agreement, 11
attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. § 135(c). 12
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this JUDGMENT shall be 13
placed in the files of (1) Peak application 12/841,457 and (2) Scarlato U.S. Patent 14
7,714,121 B2. 15
3

cc (via electronic mail):
Attorney for Scarlato:
Matthew I. Kreeger, Esq.
Otis Littlefield, Esq.
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
mkreeger@mofo.com
olittlefield@mofo.com

Attorney for Peak:
John P. Isacson, Esq.
Todd R. Samelman, Esq.
PERKINS COIE LLP
jisacson@perkinscoie.com
tsamelman@perkinscoie.com