Interference No. 103,878
suppress are simply irrelevant for this reason. As to JP179,
cited by the junior party as calling for speculation, it is
undenied, by any witness, that Thompson had Henson and Milling
over to his office to discuss a reflector and whether Henson
could supply such a
reflector. Thus, it does not require speculation on Henson’s
part to have been asked what Henson understood Thompson to be
asking for. Suppression on this ground is DENIED. Likewise,
Milling’s testimony at JP246-49 will not be suppressed for the
same reason.
However, with respect to pages JP182-83, concerning
patentability and the GE publication, the junior party
argument that the questions are beyond the scope of direct,
i.e., the original Henson declaration, is well taken. The
testimony on these pages relating to the publication will be
suppressed. The motion is GRANTED to this extent.
The question about Henson knowing if Thompson had
talked to a competitor (JP194) is not hearsay and is not seen
as irrelevant. Suppression on these grounds is not warranted.
The testimony (JP200-01, JP210-11) regarding people who
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007