Interference No. 103,203
to others working on the tissue factor project that he had determined that (a) full
length, mature tissue factor consisted of 263 amino acids, (b) the sequence of a
nucleotide molecule encoding the complete amino acid sequence of full length,
mature tissue factor from amino acid 1 to amino acid 263, and (c) the complete
amino acid sequence for full length, mature tissue factor from amino acid 1 to
amino acid 263 [Nemerson Brief, p. 20, Fact 43].
Nemerson et al. point to Dr. Bloem’s statement that
In early February 1987, following a regular Wednesday lab meeting for the tissue
factor project, I received information from Dr. Ronald Bach (“Dr. Bach”) indicating
that he had determined that no significant gaps remained in the nucleotide
sequence encoding mature human tissue factor that had been compiled in the
laboratory of Dr. Konigsberg [NR 174, para. 5].
Dr. Bloem further testifies that she called Dr. Spicer at home after the meeting to inform
her that this milestone had been reached. NR 174, para. 6.
Nemerson et al. also point to Dr. Lin’s statement that in January or February 1987,
he attended a lab meeting for the tissue factor project and that he
received information from Dr. Bach indicating that a complete nucleotide sequence
encoding the full length mature human tissue factor had been determined and that
the identity and order of all of the encoded amino acids to full length mature human
tissue factor, from amino acid 1 to amino acid 263 had been identified. NR 2861-
2861, para. 3.
We find Nemerson et al.’s reliance on these statements to be misplaced. First, Dr.
Bach is not a co-inventor and, thus, his testimony does not require corroboration. Second,
we discussed above, our reasons for finding that Dr. Bach is not a credible witness. To
the extent that Nemerson et al. are relying on the oral testimony of Drs. Bloem and Lin,
taken some eight (8) years later, as further evidence that on February 3, 1987, Dr. Bach
was in possession of a species within the scope of Count 2, we find their testimony
insufficient for several reasons.
First, neither Dr. Bloem nor Dr. Lin testify as to the actual date of the lab meeting
49
Page: Previous 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007