Interference No. 104,101
Page 13
F27. The March 17 portion of laboratory notebook page 266 also contains notations that would
appear to be elemental analysis results. Mr. Cullinan’s testimony fails to explain how the
elemental analysis notations in his notebook demonstrate that he produced the depicted structure
as opposed to a different compound having the same empirical formula. Moreover, the elemental
analysis notations are consistent with compounds having the same empirical formula as the
depicted structure but falling outside of the count.
Bottom Half of Cullinan Notebook Page 266
F28. According to Mr. Cullinan, on March 22, 1993 he entered onto page 266 of his notebook
(EX 1201, Bates No. 3013) a process for further preparing the March 17, 1993 product. Mr.
Cullinan testifies that he conducted the described reaction process and formed 330 mg of
product. (EX 1152, ¶ 37). On March 23, 1993, Mr. Cullinan is said to have sent this product for
mass spectroscopy analysis and elemental analysis. (EX 1211, Bates No. 3071). Mr. Cullinan
states that the results of the analyses “helped to confirm” that he made a compound having the
structure depicted on page 266 of his notebook. (EX 1152, ¶ 38).
F29. Mr. Cullinan has failed to explain how the “mass spectroscopy analysis and the elemental
analysis helped to confirm” that he had made the compound depicted on page 266 of his
notebook.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007