Interference 102,728
D. Singh’s case for priority
In view of its brevity, Singh’s argument with respect to conception is reproduced
in its entirety:
Singh respectfully submits that there can be no argument, in the wake of
the decision of the Court in this case reflected at 55 USPQ2d 1673 (Fed. Cir.
2000) that Singh in fact had conception of the invention, including “the formation
in the mind of the inventor of a definite and permanent idea of the complete and
operative invention” no later than December 1, 1982. 55 USPQ2d at 1676, citing
Kridl v. McCormick, 105 F.3d 1446, 1449, 41 USPQ2d 1686, 1689 (Fed. Cir.
1997). That specific and definite formation of the invention was the use of the
24-mer oligonucleotide ordered by Singh on December 1, 1982, whose order
was corroborated, for use in the loop deletion method earlier developed.
Although there are a variety of points of proof that may be relied on for
corroboration, including the notebooks, the synthesis request, Singh's notation
on the intended use of the synthesis request, all relied upon by the Court, the
most compelling piece of evidence is the nature of the 24-mer itself. The 24-mer
is the specific and complete oligonucleotide, having the necessary
complementarity, to “loop out” the undesired sequences otherwise expressed by
the " factor [Paper No. 180, pp. 9-10].
Contrary to our intention, Singh has failed to provide us with the arguments and
citations to the record, that it apparently provided to the Court in Singh v. Brake, 222
F.3d 1362, 55 USPQ2d 1673 (Fed. Cir. 2000). When there is no citation to the record,
it is very difficult, for us “to consider the evidence in the December 21 entry, to
reconsider Singh’s ‘substantial use’ argument, and to reevaluate the totality of the
corroborative evidence on remand.” Singh v. Brake, 222 F.3d at 1370, 55 USPQ2d
at 1679. We cannot consider arguments which are not made and evidence which is not
provided. Given the lack of citations to the record by Singh, it is not clear whether
Singh intends to rely on (i) the arguments and evidence provided in its original brief i.e.,
51
Page: Previous 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007