(11) Fujikawa v. Wattanasin, 93 F.3d 1559, 39
USPQ2d 1895 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
From these cases the following interference principles
become manifest:
b. Suppression and concealment are questions of
law. Fujikawa, 93 F.3d at 1567, 39 USPQ2d at 1901.
c. Suppression and concealment issues are
resolved on the basis of the specific facts of each case. Young,
489 F.2d at 1280, 180 USPQ at 391; Shindelar, 628 F.2d at 1341,
207 USPQ at 115-16.
d. The party alleging suppression or concealment
has the burden of proof. Young, 489 F.2d at 1279, 180 USPQ at
390. See also 37 CFR § 1.632, which requires a party to give
notice that it intends to argue that its opponent suppressed or
concealed, thereby giving the opponent an opportunity to present
evidence to negate any inference of intent to suppress or
conceal.2
e. The length of time from an actual reduction
to practice until filing an application is not by itself
determinative of suppression or concealment. Young, 489 F.2d at
1281, 180 USPQ at 391.
2 Notice of Final Rule, Patent Interference Proceedings, 49 Fed.
Reg. 48416, 48423 (col. 3) (Dec. 12, 1984): "The purpose of requiring the notice
under § 1.632 is to make the parties and the Board aware during the interlocutory
stage of an interference that abandonment, suppression, or concealment may be an
issue in the interference. Early notice will permit the parties to ask for and
the *** [administrative patent judge] to set appropriate testimony periods for a
party to present evidence related to *** suppression, and concealment,
particularly in those cases where long unexplained delays tend to prove the
allegation of suppression or concealment."
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007