Interference No. 104,403
in the art to make the patented invention.” Gambro Lundia AB v. Baxter
Healthcare Corp., 110 F.3d 1573, 1578, 42 USPQ2d 1378, 1383 (Fed.
Cir. 1997).
The junior party has the burden of establishing that there was a
communication to Conley of the invention in such a way as to enable a
person of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the invention and that
Conley communicated the invention to the senior party in such a way as
to enable a person of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the
invention. This the junior party has not done.
In an affidavit submitted by the junior party (Rosenthal Exhibit
2159), Rosenthal testifies that he communicated the complete
conception of his optical lens system to Conley in a meeting on July 12,
1990, by showing and explaining drawings thereof to Conley (Rosenthal
Record pages 147-49). Rosenthal also testifies that on November 8,
1990, he sent a certified letter to Conley which included a drawing of
the junior party’s optical lens system that had been shown to Conley
during the meeting on July 12, 1990. The letter is said to be an
additional communication of the conception (Rosenthal Record pages
149-50). A copy of the letter and drawing has been submitted as
Exhibit 2011 (Rosenthal Record pages 75 and 210).
An examination of the letter reveals little concerning the
39
Page: Previous 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007