Interference No. 104,241
T. Jeon, one of the named inventors in Jeon et al.'s involved
application, actually reduced to practice an embodiment within
the count on a date prior to Cupps et al.'s December 17, 1993,
effective filing date. Specifically, Jeon et al. assert that
Yoon T. Jeon synthesized the compound of claim 29 of their
involved application as evidenced by a page from Jeon's
laboratory notebook. See Exhibit B to Paper Number 10 and
Exhibit 1 to Exhibit B. The alleged actual synthesis of the
compound of Jeon et al.'s claim 29 is urged to have been
corroborated by Murali Dhar's declaration (Exhibit C) wherein
Dhar declared that it is his signature on the bottom of Jeon's
notebook page under the heading "Witnessed and Understood by
me". Dhar also declared to have observed the synthesis of the
compound as set forth by Jeon in Jeon's notebook and that the
date the compound was synthesized was "prior to December 17,
1993".
The APJ held that even assuming, arguendo, that Jeon et
al.'s showing proved that a compound within the count was
synthesized prior to December 17, 1993, there was no evidence
submitted with Jeon et al.'s showing under 37 C.F.R. §
1.608(b) which established any utility for the compound
20
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007