1033 (Fed. Cir. 1993); Hedgewick v. Akers, 497 F.2d 905, 908, 182 USPQ 167, 169
(CCPA 1974).
As we have detailed above, the junior party has failed to prove conception of the
invention prior to the filing date of the '700 patent. As such, the junior party has likewise
failed to prove derivation.
Conclusion
We have examined the evidence as regards to priority of invention of the junior
party as a whole, not individually, in determining whether Bernardy conceived the
inventions of the counts before Powell.
After careful review of the record and consideration of the Bernardy arguments,
we conclude that Bernardy has not proved conception nor reduction to practice by the
junior party of every limitation of the count prior to November 17, 1997. In particular,
Bernardy has not shown that he had possession of the conception or reduction to
practice of a blade in which the cutting segments form an opening that is radially
outward of the juncture of the cutting segment and the blade disk body.
-30-
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007