Appeal No. 1997-4438
Application No. 08/173,431
Appellant argues (Brief, page 9) that “the uses were not for
the purposes of commercial exploitation of the inventions, and
[that] the inventions were not publicly distributed.” The
examiner contends (Answer, page 4) that appellant has admitted
(Specification, page 12) public use of the claimed invention
because the invention was “screened” at the trade show
“Digital World” in June 1992, and it
won “Best Narrative category” and “Best Overall Movie” at the
QuickTimeFilm Festival in San Francisco in May 1992. Boisseau
indicates (page 4B, column 1) that the inventor gave several
demonstrations of his work at “computer and interactive film
shows.” Exhibition at a trade show has been deemed to be for
exploitative purposes that are commercial by nature. In re
Tone Brothers, 28 F.3d 1192, 1199, 31 USPQ2d 1321, 1325 (Fed.
Cir. 1994). Testing the market is indicative of commercial
exploitation. In re TP Laboratories, Inc. v. Professional
Positioners, Inc., 724 F.2d 965, 972, 220 USPQ 577, 583 (Fed.
Cir. 1984). Evidence of experimentation is part of the
totality of the circumstances considered in a public use
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007