I have carefully studied, the Bertenshaw
Application USSN 08/425,029 (DE 61, pages 0146-
0233), and in vitro assays used therein, and the
Declaration for Ducharme of Dr. A. Jerry Kresge (DE
6), and based on that study I have found the
following:
29. Huang argues that the testimony of the Merck
witnesses relate to problems with in vitro testing in general
and is applicable to all compounds regardless of their
structure (Paper 47 at 6).
30. Huang argues that Merck should be bound by
its admissions in the '845 or '873 interferences under
principles of judicial estoppel (Paper 47 at 6).
Priority
31. Prasit relies upon the 29 August 1994 filing
date of its benefit application, 08/297,461. Prasit argues
that Huang has not established a date of invention prior to
the 29 August 1994 filing date (Paper 49 at 1).
32. Huang argues that it "has established a date of
invention, i.e., an actual reduction to practice, of the
subject matter defined by the interference count at least as
early as September 28, 1993" (Paper 46 at 1).
33. According to Huang, on 2 September 1993,
inventor Dr. Horng-Chih Huang entered, in his notebook,
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007