the earlier listed dates (Paper 274 at 76) of using the
interferometer or maintaining the interferometer were directly
related to reducing the invention to practice.
Specifically, Anderson fails to direct us to sufficient
evidence that would explain the experimental use of the grating
writing equipment and maintenance thereof, as it applies to
reducing the invention to practice.
The difficulty with Anderson's diligence case is that there
is no demonstration, supported by sufficient evidence, that the
inventors were performing all of the other tasks with the goal in
mind of reducing the invention to practice. In April 1992, prior
to Anderson's alleged conception, Dr. Mizrahi was interested in
growing Bragg gratings in optical fibers by exposing the fibers
to an interference pattern formed by overlapping two beams of
ultraviolet light from an interferometer (AR 1-2, 1 4). It is
not until 19 November 1992 that Mizrahi even mentions in his lab
notebook entries of attempting to reduce the claimed invention to
practice. Up to that point, there is not sufficient evidence
that Mizrahi, or Erdogan were performing the "related activities"
with the goal in mind of reducing the invention to practice.
Anderson relies on attorney argument to assert that the inventors
did perform the "related activities" with the goal in mind of
reducing the invention to practice. However, argument by counsel
cannot take the place of evidence lacking in the record.
33
Page: Previous 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007