Interference No. 102,668
has the right to stand on his position that the junior party
failed to present a prima facie case).
For the foregoing reasons, we agree with McMahon
that Cavanagh has an affirmative duty to prove by a
preponderance of the evidence that the acts relied on to prove
a date of invention occurred in this country, i.e., that it is
more likely than not that the acts relied on to prove a date
of invention occurred in this country. Bosies, 27 F.3d at
541-42, 30 USPQ2d at 1864.
Turning now to the merits, while Packard testified
that the testing he observed took place at the "Hazeltine
facility known as 'the quarry'" (CR 4, para. 3), he did not
identify its location. Likewise, Pelrin, who testified that
"[t]he original transducer stack shown in the photograph
[Exhibit D] is still at the Hazeltine facility in Braintree,"
failed to explain where Braintree is located. Nor did any
witness identify the location of the "Quincy" mentioned in the
first page of the Cavanagh memorandum to Moore (Exhibit G),
which states that "Figures 2 and 3 show the transmit response
measured at Quincy." However, this is not the only evidence
of record which tends to show where the acts occurred. All of
- 17 -
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007