Interference No. 104,190
d) the propriety of the junior party’s renewed motion to
correct inventorship;
e) the junior party entitlement to an award of priority.
Burden of Proof
As the junior party in an interference between
co-pending applications, junior party Parins bears the burden
of proving priority by a preponderance of the evidence. See
Cooper v. Goldfarb, 154 F.3d 1321, 1326, 47 USPQ2d 1896, 1900
(Fed. Cir. 1998)(quoting Scott v. Finney, 34 F.3d 1058, 1061,
32 USPQ2d 1115, 1117 (Fed. Cir. 1994)).
Interpretation of the Interference Count
The parties have raised the issue of the proper
interpretation of the interference count. The proper
interpretation of a count is a question of law. Credle v.
Bond, 25 F.3d 1566, 1571, 30 USPQ2d 1911, 1915 (Fed. Cir.
1994)(citing Davis v. Loesch, 998 F.2d 963, 967, 27 USPQ2d
1440, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1993)). The established standard of
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007