Interference No. 103,878
and Vol. III, § 542 (Michie Co. 1947) and for reduction to
practice, Vol. III §§ 543 and 544.
Senior Party’s Originality Case
While no one has seriously challenged the fact that
the senior party has contributed to the conception of the
invention, and is at least a co-inventor, senior party has
sought to show a full and completely independent conception of
the invention
prior to the meeting of Thompson with Henson and Milling on
February 17, 1993, which would establish that Thompson is a
sole inventor. For proof of this conception, the senior7
party is relying on a facsimile transmission from Thompson to
Yarborough at South Carolina Electric and Gas on January 26,
1993. However, Thompson was the senior party’s only witness.
Yarborough did not testify. This raises an issue of
corroboration with regard to the facsimile, SX-1. At oral
hearing, senior party’s counsel argued that the facsimile
7See senior party brief footnote 1.
16
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007