Interference 103,781
of the “;7" in “ATRICH.DIS;7” in this record. An explanation
thereof is important because Fischhoff’s undated written
memorandum (MDX 1478) is identified in the VAX computer system
as “ATRICH.DIS;2557" (MDX 1478). We find no explanation, and
Fischhoff does not point to an explanation, of the significance
of the “;2557" in “ATRICH.DIS;2557" in this record. Without
further explanation, we are unable to relate “ATRICH.DIS;7" to
“ATRICH.DIS;2557" for any purpose whatsoever. We find no basis
upon which to accept the October 30, 1986 date of “ATRICH.DIS;7"
as the date the written memorandum identified in MDX 1478 as
“ATRICH.DIS;2557" was drafted. However, we find on this record
substantial evidence that Fischhoff conceived of the invention of
Claim 3 of Fischhoff’s involved application corresponding to
Count 2 no later than December 12, 1986 (MDX 1464).
Our finding that Fischhoff first conceived of the invention
of Count 2 no later than December 12, 1986, does not prejudice
either party’s case for priority of the invention of Count 2 for
two basic reasons. First, we find that the entries into
Fischhoff’s Monsanto Company laboratory notebook most assuredly
provide the best evidence of the invention conceived by
Fischhoff’s inventors and the directions for future work to
facilitate expression of Bt genes encoding toxic proteins in
plants. When asked if it was his “practice to keep pretty
-82-
Page: Previous 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007