Interference No. 103,169
letter signed by Timmons, dated January 23, 1983; AFSC Form 91, signed by M. Schultz,
dated January 4, 1983; and a technical proposal dated January, 1983. The cover letter
indicates that in addition to the technical proposal and AFSC Form 91, a cost proposal
was attached and submitted as part of the proposal. The cost proposal, CX 34, signed by
Laurence Peterson, contains a date of submission of ?31 January 83.” The contract
solicitation was due January 31, 1983.
Timmons testified that he had every reason to believe that the technical proposal,
dated ?January 83,” and the cost proposal dated January 31, 1983, and the associated
cover letter were completed before January 23, 1983 (CR 18: 1884-85), and sent to the
government ?on or about January 23, 1983,” the date of the cover letter (CR 18: 1780-
1781). During cross examination, Timmons could not testify as to the actual date Mr.
Peterson signed the cost proposal, but he did explain that the “date of submission” on the
cost proposal form was the due date to the AF. During further cross examination, January
23, 1983, was shown to be a Sunday whereupon Timmons indicated that the contract
proposal was not sent out on January 23, 1983, but rather sometime before the January
31, 1983, due date (CR18:1900). Because the Chenevey et al. record does not
establish, with corroboration by a noninventor, a date certain as to when the technical
proposal dated ?January 83” was actually prepared and by whom and its content, we find
that Chenevey et al. is only entitled to the date of January 31, 1983, for conception, the
date that the contract was due at AFWP.
24
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007