Interference No. 104,403
1329, 217 USPQ 753, 755 (Fed. Cir. 1983). Corroboration is also
necessary to prove reduction to practice. The corroboration can be in
the form of testimony of a witness, other than the inventor, to an actual
reduction to practice, or it may consist of evidence of surrounding facts
and circumstances independent of the information received from the
inventor.
The purpose of the rule requiring corroboration is to prevent
fraud and to establish by proof that is unlikely to have been fabricated
or falsified, that the inventor successfully reduced his invention to
practice. Berry v. Webb, 412 F.2d 261, 267, 162 USPQ 170, 174
(CCPA 1969). The evidence necessary for corroboration is
determined by the rule of reason which involves an examination,
analysis and evaluation of the record as a whole to the end that a
reasoned determination as to the credibility of the inventor’s story may
be reached. Berges v. Gottstein, 618 F.2d 771, 776, 205 USPQ 691,
695 (CCPA 1980); Mann v. Werner, 347 F.2d 636, 640, 146 USPQ
199, 202 (CCPA 1965).
The junior party argues that he prepared a prototype on May 5,
1990, of a lens sheet having conical lenses on the viewing surface,
and having on the opposite surface, a plurality of spaced-apart raised
parallel portions with a composite image positioned thereupon with
21
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007