communicated the results summarized in the memorandum (at FF 55) to either
of the Furman inventors.
The separate enantiomers of BCH- 18
59. According to Furman, anti-HBV testing of the separate enantiomers of BCH- 189
did not begin until July of 1991 (Paper 88 at 13 and 23-24).
L11. Discussion
A. The inventorship, evidence (i.e., exhibits 2037-2049)
Initially we note that Furman's principal brief on the issue of priority (Paper 85) appears
to rely upon evidence that was submitted pursuant to the Order entered 22 January 2002 ( "the
inventorship evidence") found at Exhibits 2037-2049. For example, Furman relies upon the
following evidence ("the inventorship evidence") in its principal brief:
(A) Dr. Furman's testimony (Exh. 2049),
(B) Dr. Liotta's letters (Exhs. 2037 and 2038), and
(C) the agreement between BW and Emory University (Exh. 2040).
It would seem improper for Furman to rely upon the inventorship evidence to establish priority in
view of the Order. (FFs 19 and 20).
Belleau did not file a motion to suppress the inventorship evidence. (FF 2 1). Our
consideration of the inventorship evidence does not appear to unfairly prejudice Belleau in the
interference, since, even when we consider this evidence, we determine that Furman has not
shown that it is prior to Belleau.
19
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007