Appeal No. 1999-1002
Application No. 08/672,493
(E) extent of any obligations or limitation placed
on a user during a period of experimental activity,
as well as the extent of an testing actually
performed during such period (Egbert v. Lippmann,
104 U.S. 333 (1881));
(F) conditional nature of any sale associated with
experimental activity (Hall v. Macneale, 107 U.S. 90
(1882));
(G) length of time and number of cases in which
experimental activity took place, viewed in light of
what was reasonably necessary for an alleged
experimental purpose (International Tooth Crown Co.
v. Gaylord, 140 U.S. 55 (1891));
(H) explicit or implicit obligations placed upon a
user to supply an inventor with the results of any
testing conducted during an experimental period and
the extent of inquiry made by the inventor regarding
the testing (Monon Corp. v. Stoughton Trailers,
Inc., 239 F.3d 1253, 1258, 57 USPQ2d 1699, 1703
(Fed. Cir. 2001); Robbins Co. v. Lawrence Mfg. Co.,
482 F.2d 426, 434, 178 USPQ 577, 583 (9th Cir.
1973));
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007