not whether other terms for classes of masks were used, but
rather any "other terms".
Snitzer further argues that Hill's argument that Rishton was
confused about when he discussed phase masks is without merit
(Paper 306 at 11). Specifically, Snitzer argues that Hill's
theory is inconsistent with Dr. Rishton's testimony that during
the initial conversation with the Snitzer inventors both phase
and amplitude masks were discussed, and with Dr. Rishton's
recollection that he informed the Snitzer inventors that he could
not make a phase mask since he did not have an established
process for doing so.
Snitzer fails to provide a sufficient explanation for why
Hill's theory is wrong. It is correct that Dr. Rishton testified
that during the initial conversation the term phase mask was
discussed. However, it is also true that Dr. Rishton later
recalled that no other term was used to refer to the masks
discussed, other than grating mask. Furthermore, Snitzer fails
to provide a sufficient explanation for Rishton's testimony that
his recollection of discussing phase masks was based on
calculations on phase masks that the Snitzer inventors performed.
The calculations, however were performed subsequent to the
alleged conception date. As likely as it is that Dr. Rishton did
discuss with the Snitzer inventors phase masks during the July
1992 meetings, it is equally as likely, based on this record,
43
Page: Previous 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007