Interference No. 103,029
complete and operative invention. Coleman v. Dines, 754 F.2d
353, 359, 224 USPQ 857, 862 (Fed. Cir. 1985)(quoting Gunter v.
Stream, 573 F.2d 77, 80, 197 USPQ 482, 484 (CCPA 1978)). It
is settled that in establishing conception a party must show
every feature recited in the count, and that every limitation
in the count must have been known at the time of the alleged
conception. Coleman, 754 F.2d at 359, 224 USPQ at 862.
Thus, the test for conception is whether the
inventor had an idea that was definite and permanent enough
that one
skilled in the art could understand the invention. Burroughs
Wellcome Co. v. Barr Lab. Inc., 40 F.3d 1223, 1228, 32 USPQ2d
1915, 1919 (Fed. Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1130
(1995) and cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1070 (1996). An idea is
definite and permanent when the inventor has a specific,
settled idea, a particular solution to the problem at hand,
not just a general goal or research plan he hopes to pursue.
Id. See, also Fiers, 984 F.2d at 1169, 25 USPQ2d at 1605;
Amgen, Inc. v. Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., 927 F.2d 1200, 1206,
32
Page: Previous 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007