Interference No. 103,146
948 F.2d 1264, 1269, 20 USPQ2d 1746, 1750 (Fed. Cir.
1991)(citing Great Northern
Corp. v. Davis Core & Pad Co., 782 F.2d 159, 164-65, 228 USPQ
356, 358 (Fed. Cir. 1986)). Secondly, where there is no sale,
a definite offer to sell is an essential requirement of the
on-sale bar. RCA Corp. v. Data Gen. Corp., 887 F.2d 1056,
1062, 12 USPQ2d 1449, 1454 (Fed. Cir. 1989). The requirement
of a definite offer excludes merely indefinite or nebulous
discussion about a possible sale. Id.
In short, we have not found that Shore’s declaration
did not withstand cross-examination as alleged in Barker’s
Brief at 43. Considering all the evidence concerning the
scope of commercial activities during Shore’s field visits, it
is our
determination that Barker has not shown that Elson’s assignee
offered for sale the latex disk embodiment more than one year
prior to the effective filing date by a preponderance of the
42
Page: Previous 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007