segments and a blade having a juncture of the cutting segments which is inclined from
trailing end to leading end radially inward.
In addition, conception must be corroborated by a person other than the inventor.
This corroboration must show that the inventor disclosed to others his "completed
thought expressed in such clear terms as to enable those skilled in the art to make the
invention." Coleman, 754 F.2d at 359, 224 USPO at 862; Field v. Knowles, 183 F.2d
593, 601, 86 USPQ 373, 379 (CCPA 1950). It must also show by corroborated evidence
that the party was in possession of every feature of the count and that every limitation of
the count was known to the inventors at the time. Hitzeman v. Rutter, 243 F.3d 1345,
1354-55, 58 USPQ2c1 1161, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2001); Coleman, 754 F.2d at 359, 224
USPQ at 862.
If Bernardy establishes that he conceived of the inventions of counts 1 and 2 prior
to the filing date of the '700 patent and supplies corroborating evidence of the
conception, he must also establish that he exercised due diligence from just prior to the
filing date of the '700 patent until Bernardy reduced the invention of the counts to
practice. Mahurkar, 79 F.3d at 1577, 38 USPQ2d at 1290.
D. Reduction to practice by the munior party in 1994
The junior party, in his preliminary statement and in his brief alleges that the
invention of both counts was reduced to practice on July 12, 1994.
The junior party states that Exhibit 2008 (Bernardy Record page 14) and Exhibit
2056 (Bernardy Record page 81) are depictions of a blade which was reduced to
practice on July 12, 1994.
-18-
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007