Interference No. 103,675
the "Statement of Facts" section of the brief which support the
arguments made therein. Thus, we agree with Bouchard et al.'s comment
from page 1 of their brief that Chen et al. have forced this Board
(and Bouchard et al.) to search the "Statement of Facts" section of
their brief for the underlying basis for the legal conclusions Chen et
al. would have us reach based on their argument. This not only places
an undue burden on both this Board and Bouchard et al. but it unfairly
places Bouchard et al. in the position of having to conjecture as to
what forms the basis for the various arguments and contentions made by
their opponent. Thus, Chen et al.'s brief placed Bouchard et al. in
the position of responding to Chen et al.'s various positions without
actually knowing the underlying basis for many of Chen et al.'s
arguments and positions. Suffice it to say it is virtually impossible
to respond to a position taken where the underlying factual basis for
the position is not known.
It does not serve Chen et al. to argue that they have
referenced large portions of their statement of facts in their brief.
For example, at pages 156 through 157 of their brief, Chen et al., in
alluding to several alleged actual reductions to practice of the
subject matter of the counts, direct this Board and Bouchard et al. to
enormous sections of their statement of facts section of their brief
without any specific references to particular facts which support
73
Page: Previous 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007