Appeal No. 1999-1002
Application No. 08/672,493
environment” was required for the testing of the coated rolls
because of the number of variables that can affect the rolls'
performance could not be simulated in the lab. See
Appellants' Brief, page 7. The appellants further argue that
a real environment was required to determine the utility of
the experimental fuser rolls as a replacement for conventional
rolls in the market. According to appellants, the claimed
rolls had to produce the same quantity of copies as the
conventional rolls, a quantity equal to 2.2 million copies,
for the rolls to fulfill their intended purpose of replacing
the existing fuser roll designs. Further, they argue that the
field-testing procedure required a substantial but reasonable
period of time in order for the experimental rolls to produce
the target quantity of 2.2 million copies.
After careful consideration of the record before us, we
agree with appellants that the field-testing activities
conducted in the period between February 1994 and November 10,
1995 fall within the experimental use exception for public
use. In discussing our position, we refer to the factors (A)
through (K) listed above that are determinative of
experimental use.
We agree with appellants that the nature of the invention
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007