Interference No. 103,208
Hoshino et al. v. Tanaka
date of Tanaka’s first Japanese priority application, when
Tanaka filed the second Japanese priority application (61-
058453), that Tanaka recognized the need for considering the
sign of the
defocus amount in calculating the corrected conversion
coefficient.5
Hoshino also states (Br. at 39) that until the filing of
Tanaka’s involved United States application, Tanaka, "an
expert in designing autofocus cameras," did not even mention
[in the two Japanese priority applications] a formula
including a first order term of the defocus amount for
calculating the corrected conversion coefficient.
Hoshino’s line of argument based on what Tanaka did or
did not describe in the first and/or second Japanese priority
application was not presented in Hoshino’s original Motion H2
(Paper No. 14). Thus, the APJ could not have erred or abused
5Tanaka’s first Japanese priority application 60-219521
has a filing date of October 2, 1985. Tanaka’s second
Japanese priority application 61-058453 has a filing date of
March 17, 1986.
- 33 -
Page: Previous 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007