Court Opinions
State Laws
|
PATENT INTERFERENCES NO. 102,922 & 103,088 DUMAS V. GILL - Page 15
Legal Research Home >
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences > 1997 > PATENT INTERFERENCES NO. 102,922 & 103,088 DUMAS V. GILL - Page 15
Interference No. 102,922
Interference No. 103,088
Techentin’s answer do not establish that Techentin did not
have original knowledge as to alkyl ketene dimer formula. In
our
view, the record indicates that Techentin, an employee of
Hercules since 1956 in a variety of positions, had personal
knowledge of alkyl ketene dimer and its structure as evidenced
by Techentin's testimony that Aquapel® 364 was a flake dimer,
alkyl ketene dimer which Hercules began making in 1958 and
that it had not changed significantly since that time; that
when asked if he could draw the formula, his initial response
was “If I can have a pen.” and “Can I reference anything?”;
that it had been a long
time since he drew the structure for a seminar and that the
formula he drew was of a general nature with the R’s being
residues of fatty acids having chain lengths of C8-C30. DR
298-301.
Furthermore, the interference record as a whole clearly
establishes the structural formula for the alkyl ketene dimer
and confirms the controverted testimony of Techentin. See
discussion, infra.
V.
The Dumas case for priority
15
Page: 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Last modified: November 3, 2007
|
|
