BEAM vs. CHASE - Page 9



                Interference No. 103,836                                                                                                

                CX-12, does not disclose a locking means to hold the appliqué in place.  This was admitted by                           
                the inventor Chase in Chase’s record at pages 2 and 53, and there is no evidence that Chase                             
                conceived of the assembly as including a locking means at that time.  Still further, there is no                        
                evidence that the appliqué of the wheel assembly included an outer annular connecting portion                           
                disposed adjacent one of the rim flanges as required by the count.  CX-12 shows that the                                
                appliqué has outwardly extending fingers but no outer annular portion connecting the fingers.                           
                        A second document relied on by Chase is identified in the record as CX-13.  It is a letter                      
                composed by the inventor dated February 24, 1992 relating to a chrome plated composite/cast                             
                aluminum wheel.  As noted by the party Beam, the letter simply describes the invention as                               
                including a wheel, a cover and an adhesive to attach the cover to the wheel, and refers to the                          
                drawing identified as CX-12.  There is no testimony related to CX-13 establishing that the wheel                        
                referred to therein included locking means, or that the appliqué included an outer annular                              
                connecting portion.                                                                                                     
                        A third document (CX-16) relied on by the senior party is a memo dated March 16, 1992                           
                authored by the inventor Chase.  The contention is made that item 2 at page A16964 establishes                          
                conception by Chase of the subject matter of the count with a locking means.  However, a                                
                locking means is not specifically disclosed in CX-16 and the inventor’s testimony at CR-71 that                         
                item 2 relates to bosses or snap tabs or mechanical devices is simply not corroborated.                                 
                        Regardless of our negative findings above with respect to Chase’s case for prior                                
                conception, we are of the opinion that the party Chase has established a date of conception of                          
                May 26, 1992, the date on the drawing identified in the record as CX-14.  The corroborating                             
                witness, Kevin Burch, testified that he made the drawing under the supervision of the inventor,                         
                Lee Chase, and that it was completed by him on or about May 26, 1992.                                                   
                                                                  -9-                                                                   



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007