Interference No. 103,146
Barker acknowledges that any proof of conception or
reduction to practice must be corroborated. Brief at 53.
Barker relies on Price, 988 F.2d at 1195, 26 USPQ2d at 1037,
for the proposition that the exhibits, and specifically BX-
118, provide indisputable corroboration of Barker’s inventive
acts and that there is no need for any further corroborating
evidence. Elson argues that independent corroboration is
needed, and we agree.
It is clear that the case law requires corroboration
independent from the inventor. Taking the example of the
Price
case, the testimony of the secretary/spouse, Mrs. Price, was
necessary to show the existence of the drawings in the files
of
the company to establish a date of conception. Although
adoption of the rule of reason has eased the requirement of
corroboration with respect to the quantum of evidence
necessary to establish the inventor’s credibility, it has not
altered the requirement
16
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007