wing cutters and disk body which is inclined from a trailing end to a leading end radially
inward.
C. The precedents
Reduction to practice
In order to prove actual reduction to practice, one must establish that a physical
embodiment of the invention existed and that the physical embodiment included every
limitation of the count and that it worked for its intended purpose. Correge v. Murph
705 F.2d 1326, 1329, 217 USPQ 753, 755 (Fed. Cir. 1983). Corroboration is also
necessary to prove reduction to practice. The corroboration can be in 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. Bemes v. Gottstein, 618 F.2d 771, 776, 205 USPQ
691, 695 (CCPA 1980); Mann v. Werne , 347 F.2d 636, 640, 146 USPQ 199, 202
(CCPA 1965).
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007