`
`
`EXHIBIT 4
`EXHIBIT 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BoxInterferences@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-9797
`
`Entered: December 31, 2019
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Anatoli Ledenev
`and
`Robert M.Porter,
`Junior Party
`(Patent 8,004,116),
`
`V.
`
`Meir Adest,
`GuySella, Lior Handelsman, Yoav Galin,
`Amir Fishelov, Meir Gazit, Yaron Binder
`and
`Nikolay Radimov,
`Senior Party
`(Application 13/430,388).
`
`Patent Interference No. 106,054 (JTM)
`(Technology Center 2800)
`
`Before SALLY G. LANE, JAMES T. MOORE,and DEBORAH KATZ,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MOORE,Administrative Patent Judge
`
`JUDGMENT- Bd. R.127(a)
`
`AMPT-ITC 0047747
`
`
`
`Interference 106,054 (JTM) — Ledenev v. Adest
`Judgment
`
`A decision granting Motion | of senior party Meir Adest, Guy Sella, Lior
`
`Handelsman, Yoav Galin, Amir Fishelov, Meir Gazit, Yaron Binder and
`
`Nikolay Radimov has been entered. (Decision, Paper 186). As a result ofthis
`
`Decision,all the involved claims of senior party Anatoli Ledenev and Robert M.
`
`Porter are unpatentable to Ledenev and Ledenevlacks standing to continue in the
`
`interference. Bd. R. 201. Accordingly, we enter judgment against Ledenev.
`
`It is
`
`Order
`
`ORDEREDthat judgmenton priority is entered against junior party Ledenev
`
`as to Count 1, the sole Count of the interference (Declaration, Paper1, 4);
`
`FURTHER ORDEREDthat claims 1—29 of Ledenev patent 8,004,116,
`
`which correspond to Count 1, are CANCELED. (Declaration, Paper 1, 4); 35
`U.S.C. § 135(a);!
`
`FURTHER ORDEREDthatthe parties are directed to 35 USC § 135(c) and
`
`Bd. R. 205 regardingthe filing of settlement agreements;
`
`FURTHER ORDEREDthat a party seeking judicial review timely serve
`
`notice on the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office;
`
`37 C.F.R. §§ 90.1 and 104.2. See also Bd. R. 8(b). Attention is directed to Biogen
`
`Idec MA,Inc., v. Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 785 F.3d 648,
`
`Anyreferenceto a statute in this Judgmentis to the statute that was in effect
`1
`on March 15, 2013 unless otherwise indicated. See Pub. L. 112-29, § 3(n), 125
`Stat. 284, 293 (2011).
`
`2.
`
`AMPT-ITC 0047748
`
`
`
`Interference 106,054 (JTM) — Ledenev v. Adest
`Judgment
`
`654-57 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (determining that pre-AIA § 146 review waseliminated
`
`for interference proceedings declared after September 15, 2012); and
`
`FURTHER ORDEREDthat a copy of this judgment be entered into the
`
`administrative records of the involved Ledenev patent and involved Adest
`
`application.
`
`3-
`
`AMPT-ITC 0047749
`
`
`
`Interference 106,054 (JTM) — Ledenev v. Adest
`Judgment
`
`Attorney for Ledenev
`
`Luke Santangelo
`Alfred K. Wiedmann,Jr.
`SANTANGELO LAW OFFICES, P.C.
`luke@idea-asset.com
`alw@idea-asset.com
`
`W. Todd Baker
`OBLON, McCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT,L.L.P.
`tbaker@oblon.com
`
`Attorney for Adest
`
`Frederic M. Meeker
`Michael S. Cuviello
`Joseph M. Skerpon
`BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD.
`fmeeker@bannerwitcoff.com
`meuviello@bannerwitcoff.com
`jskerpon@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`_4-
`
`AMPT-ITC 0047750
`
`