Interference No. 104,241
In total, Jeon et al.'s evidence presented under 37
C.F.R.
§ 1.608(b) and considered by the APJ simply lacks sufficient
evidence of additional surrounding facts and circumstances,
both known by the inventor and independent thereof, which
establishes both a utility for the compound allegedly
synthesized and an appreciation of or recognition by Jeon at
the time of the alleged synthesis that he actually prepared
the compound depicted in his notebook. Accordingly, we find
that the APJ properly found Jeon et al.'s original showing to
be inadequate under the rule. We also find that the APJ
properly placed Jeon et al. under an order to show cause
pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.617(a), third sentence.
JEON ET AL.'S SUPPLEMENTAL EVIDENCE
Jeon et al. responded to the order to show cause by,
inter alia, filing additional evidence addressing the
shortcomings found by the APJ with respect to Jeon et al.'s
original showing and which Jeon et al. urge establishes: (1) a
compound within the count was, in fact, prepared before Cupps
et al. effective filling date; and, (2) the compound prepared
had utility. Jeon et al. have also made a showing which they
31
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007