October 1991 alleged date of reduction to practice and the 13 May
1994 filing of the Rowland application is unreasonably long.
Thus, an inference exists. That inference, however, is
rebuttable.
In its opposition, Rowland fails to address Weaver's
argument that the activities performed between October 1991 and
May 1994 were towards improving the three-lumen device and that
such improvements were not made part of the Rowland application.
Inventor Vergano testified that he continued working with Mr.
Eddy and Ms. Bell to improve the three-lumen sphincterotome (RR
007, ý 13). The activities that Rowland discusses in its
opposition to Weaver's brief relate to continuous efforts to
improve the three-lumen catheter.
Rowland's activities include the following: (1) in February
1992 the inventors seek to improve the quality of tubing; (2) a
meeting is held in October 1992 to discuss design problems of
trifurcation, skiving the irrigation port, paint adhesion and the
quality of the tubing; (3) in November 1992, there is a
discussion of tip orientation problems; (4) also in November
1992, a plan for development and launch of the three-lumen
catheter was discussed; (5) in June of 1993, Rowland sought
advice regarding the type of regulatory approval required for the
three-lumen catheter; (6) in July 1993 schedules were set for
tooling completion, documentation completion, testing completion
17
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007