Interference No. 102,712
would no doubt require selection of an appropriate substrate
to produce optimum results for each particular set of
conditions, and it is unlikely that one substrate would be
considered optimum under all conditions. For further
elucidation of this factor, see Augustine’s specification (p.
10, l. 16-23); ARB-39,42; AR-171; and SR 37-38.
Second, we recognize that Suzuki conducted tests in an
attempt to duplicate results reported in Augustine’s
specification (Table I, p. 14). SR 79-94. However, we agree
with Augustine that Suzuki’s tests have little bearing on the
question of “best mode” inasmuch as each of the substrates
tested were made under conditions deviating from those
disclosed by Augustine (ARB-58, Table). Also, the alloy
workpiece used by Suzuki was not the same as that machined in
Augustine’s comparative tests (ARB-59, SR 84-85).
Additionally, as previously noted, Suzuki has not established
by a preponderance of the evidence that
Augustine’s contemplated best mode was limited exclusively to
the single embodiment of his invention exemplified in Table I
of Augustine’s specification.
Third, testimony in this proceeding has brought out that
the WG-300 substrate has a whisker content of about 25% (AR
22
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007