Ex Parte JOHNSON - Page 19




                Interference No. 104,316                                                                                                               
                Sauer Inc. v. Kanzaki Kokyukoki Mfg. Co., Ltd.                                                                                         

                Johnson significantly undermines the unexplained references to structure 48 in Exhibit 2225 as a                                       
                generally L-shaped member. Accordingly, Sauer has failed to satisfy its burden of proof                                                
                         We reject Kanzaki's contention that based on Sauer's prosecution history, i.e., Sauer's                                       
                representation that the center section, being L-shaped and having horizontal and vertical legs,                                        
                allows one rotating unit to be on the upper surface of the horizontal leg, and the second rotating                                     
                unit to be on the outside surface of the vertical leg, "generally L-shaped" means that the pump                                        
                and motor must extend away from each other rather than facing each other. Based on Sauer's                                             

                representation, an L-shaped configuration allows, not requires, one of the pump and motor to be                                        
                on top of a horizontal surface and the other to be on the outside of the vertical surface. The                                         

                distinction urged by Sauer, essentially that the pump and motor are separated by a leg on the "L,"                                     
                actually derives support from other claim features which are also present in the count, i.e., that                                     
                the second mounting surface is on the second surface of the second leg opposite the first surface                                      
                of the second leg which extends at right angles away from the first surface of the first leg on                                        
                which is located the first mounting surface. In that regard, we have already explained above how                                       
                the upper right hand figure in Exhibit 2226, as annotated by Sauer, does not satisfy these                                             
                requirements.                                                                                                                          

                         For the foregoing reasons, Sauer has failed to establish complete conception of the                                           
                invention of the count prior to or on November 25, 1987, and thus Sauer has also failed to                                             
                demonstrate that Kanzaki derived the invention of the count from Sauer through a                                                       
                communication that occurred in a meeting held on November 23-25, 1987.                                                                 

                                                                     - 19 -                                                                            







Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007