m) Attachment VI to Hill Ex. 2045 Hill's edited
manuscript;
n) Attachment VII to Hill Ex. 204S letter from Sandra
Cooperman to K.O. Hill (dated 19 March 1999);
o) portions of Hill Ex. 2046 - the second declaration
of Kenneth 0. Hill (dated 23 April 2001);
p) Attachment I to Hill Ex. 2046 - letter from Zaki
Muscati to Edward Pascal (dated 14 September 1992);
q) Attachment II to Hill Ex. 2046 - report of an
invention submitted by Hill (dated 10 September 1992);
r) Hill Ex. 2057 - Publication & Press Guidelines from
a Gordon Conference;
s) Hill Ex. 2058 - comparison of Hill manuscript with
the portion of the introduction for Volume 23 that was
written by Elias Snitzer;
t) Hill Ex. 2059 - article by Mahmoud M. Abouelleil
from Volume 23 of the Annual Review of Materials
Science;
u) Anderson Ex. 1024 - copy of articles entitled
"Magnification of Mask Fabricated Fibre Bragg GratingsO
by J.D. Prohaska, E. Snitzer, S Rishton and V. Boegli
from Vol. 29, No. 18 of Electronics Letters (2
September 1993).
C. Discussion
Anderson's Case on Priorit
Anderson, as the most junior party in this interference, has
the burden of establishing priority with respect to both Hill and
Snitzer by a preponderance of the evidence. 37 CFR § 1.657(b).
Priority of invention belongs to the first party to reduce
the invention to practice unless the other party can establish
that it was the first to conceive the invention and that it
25
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007