Interference No. 104,403
asserts that the lens prototype depicted in Exhibit 2141 was admitted
by Rosenthal to be unacceptable for its intended purpose (Magee Brief
in Opposition to Rosenthal Opening Brief page 19). This position is
based on the Rosenthal statement in his affidavit that he was not sure
how well the lens sheet depicted in Exhibit 2141 would work and that it
would be necessary to make it thinner in order for it to be utilized for
one of the objects stated in his subsequent patent application, i.e. for
packaging (Rosenthal record page 34). The senior party concludes
(Magee Brief in Opposition to Rosenthal Opening Brief page 19) from
this statement that the lens sheet depicted in Exhibit 2141 was not
suitable for packaging and thus did not work for its intended purpose.
The senior party then examines the lens sheet depicted in Exhibit 2118
and concludes (Magee Brief in Opposition to Rosenthal Opening Brief
page 20) from an examination of the photograph that the lens sheet
depicted in Exhibit 2118 is no thinner than the lens sheet depicted in
Exhibit 2141. The senior party concludes that the
lens sheet depicted in Exhibit 2118 will not work for its intended
purpose, i.e. packaging.
Firstly, we note that Lauter states (Rosenthal Record page 14)
that he was shown unique packaging with the lens sheet as a window
which provided a view of an opaque image at one angle, and then at
23
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007