Interference No. 103,036
associated with the electrical switch. Moreover, the party
Cataldi et al.'s opening brief states at page 101 that on cross-
examination, “Dr. Powers admitted that the party Burroughs et
al.'s specification did not support the 'air pocket'
recitations." With respect to claim 40, which recites that the
"insulating means is an air pocket under the dielectric substrate
under the area of the conductive layer," Dr. Feder testified that
the concept of an air pocket as a part of thermal insulating
means is not taught by the Burroughs et al. specification. The
motion is denied with respect to item 7.
We have reviewed the testimony of Dr. Powers, referred
to in Sections 294 and 295 of the party Cataldi et al.'s proposed
findings of fact, and do not agree with the party Cataldi et al.
that Dr. Powers admitted at BR 177 to 179 that the Burroughs et
al. specification lacked support for the air pocket being a part
of the temperature sensitive color indicator. A fair reading of
the testimony shows that Dr. Powers is of the view that the
Burroughs et al. specification has inherent support for the air
pocket being a part of the temperature sensitive color indicator.
As we found in item 2, supra, the Burroughs et al. specification
contains a sufficient written description for the indicator
device being in the shape of a chamber, cell or bubble. Because
of this shape, we necessarily agree with the party Burroughs et
al. that the chamber, cell or bubble would also contain an air
-50-
Page: Previous 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007