defined in the inventors' minds". However, the decision went on to state that the invention still
needed to be reduced to practice through confirmation of its operability. Burroughs Wellcome,
40 F.3d at 1230, 32 USPQ2d at 1921.
b. The December activi
Furman argues that "as of December 12, 1990, there was convincing evidence that Drs.
Painter's and Furman's earlier inventive concept and simultaneous reduction to practice was
correct (Paper 88 at 22). It does not appear that Furman is arguing that the December activity
itself amounted to an actual reduction to practice. Nonetheless, near the conclusion of its
principal brief, Furman makes the statement that "[ijf December 12, 1990 is found to be the
reduction to practice date", then Furman was diligent in obtaining Dr. Korba's test results
(Paper 88 at 24).
Even if we were to construe Furman's statement as an argument that the December
activity amounts to a reduction to practice rather than a confirmation of the earlier simultaneous
conception and reduction to practice, the argument fails. For example, Furman does not explain
how the December activity shows that the Furnian inventors determined that the invention would
work for its intended purpose. In particular, Furman has not directed us to evidence sufficiently
establishing that the Furman inventors learned of Dr. Korba's results and thus determined that
BCH- 189 would work for its intended purpose.
Furman does not state that the Furnian inventors tested BCH- 189 and found it to have
anti-HBV activity. Instead, Furman states that Dr. Korba tested BCH-189 and that his test results
showed that l3CH-I 89 had anti-HBV activity. Evidence presented by Furman indicates that the
Furman inventors were on the distribution list for a BW memorandum that summarized Dr.
28
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007