Appeal No. 1999-1002
Application No. 08/672,493
We begin our analysis by indicating that the appellants,
without conceding public use, have acknowledged that certain
activities did indeed occur more than one year before the
application filing date of June 26, 1996. Appeal brief, page
5. Appellants field-tested flow coated fuser rolls beginning
on or about February 1994, and concluding on or about November
10, 1995. Appellants also acknowledge that the fuser rolls
tested were made via the claimed method.
Briefly, coated fuser rolls were tested by providing the
rolls to a number of copy machines located at several testing
sites that leased these machines from appellants' assignee
Xerox Corp. These rolls were placed inside the machines and,
once placed, were not visible to the field test users. The
machines were located in secure areas of the testing sites and
their access was limited to those having the appropriate
authority to use the machines, including test site employees
and Xerox technicians. There were no express written
confidentiality agreements between the appellant/Xerox
Corporation and the field test users but there was an
understanding that the flow coated fuser rolls were
experimental and information concerning them should be kept
confidential. See Brief, page 6. Appellants state that the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007