Interference No. 103,029
invention in the time frame at issue, because they, by
contract, never knew the composition of the “secret” copolymer
ingredient. BR13; GD¶6; Stip¶2.
Finally, Kipouras argues that it was Kipouras that
discovered the exact formulation of ABS to ECH/EO copolymer.
We have no evidence of record one way or the other on this
point. Even if this were established by evidence, in our view23
this issue pertains to reduction to practice rather than
conception or derivation. We see it as simply the exercise of
the normal skill expected of an ordinary chemist, which would
not have involved any inventive acts on the part of Kipouras.
The necessity of a certain amount of selection of sizes of
parts, materials, etc.,
23 We note that the Kipouras brief cites to the record
for this proposition, but only to show that Barnhouse was
“amazed” at the results. Any testimony about what Federl and
Kipouras did which comes from Barnhouse is clearly
speculative. Federl and Kipouras have not testified, and they
did not put on a priority case. Inasmuch as they have
eschewed priority evidence, it is difficult to see how it can
now be argued at final that they contributed to a conception.
38
Page: Previous 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007