corroboration is to prevent fraud."); Reese v. Hurst , 661 F.2d 1222, 1125, 211 USPQ 936, 940
(CCPA 1981) (" [E]vidence of corroboration must not depend solely on the inventor himself.").
Solomon alleges a date of conception of “January, 1991.” Where a period of time rather than
a specific date is alleged, the date is presumed to be the last day of the period. Oka, 849 F.2d at 584, 7
USPQ2d at 1172. Thus, Solomon is held to have alleged a conception date of January 31, 1991.
Solomon’s declaration states:
4. In January of 1991, I conceived of the invention corresponding to the
Count. I also then began researching my conception and drawing possible models
and electric circuit diagrams.
Preliminary Statement of William Solomon, p. 1, ¶ 4. This broad conclusory statement does not establish
a conception including all the limitations of one of the alternatives of the count by that date. Solomon has
not submitted any drawings or diagrams or other evidence that shows a conception including every
limitation of one of the count alternatives. Indeed, Solomon states that he is no longer in possession of the
drawings and diagrams that he made. Solomon also submitted the declaration of Miroslaba Recalde. She
testified that:
In January of 1991, William Solomon explained to me his invention which
I understood, in general, as enabling an alphabetic keypad (similar to that of a
typewriter) to be used in place of a telephone keypad, thereby allowing a user to
dial a series of letters (e.g., “1-800-FLOWERS” and “1-800-DOCTORS”)
instead of numbers to place a call. At that time, he began researching his idea and
drawing possible models and electrical circuit diagrams.
Declaration of Miroslaba Recalde, p. 1, ¶ 4. Recalde’s testimony does not show that Solomon had a
conception including every limitation of at least one of the alternatives of the count. The testimony at best
shows the broad general concept of the invention. Proof of conception must show every feature or
limitation set out in the count. Kridl, 105 F.3d at 1449, 41 USPQ2d at 1689. Thus, Solomon has failed
to prove a conception by January 31, 1991.
Solomon alleges that he submitted an invention disclosure document to his attorney on November
8, 1993. Solomon also alleges a date for the document of October 16, 1993. Solomon represents that
Exhibit D is a copy of that document. Preliminary Statement of William Solomon, p. 1, ¶ 10. Assuming
that this document discloses an embodiment meeting one of the alternatives of the count, Solomon has not
- 13 -
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007