- 424 -
specific exclusion in the parties' written stipulation of those
portions of the Estate of Cook record regarding only ARC and BRC.
Preliminarily, we note that the parties, for purposes of the
instant cases, generally stipulated in evidence the Estate of
Cook record, except for such evidence that related only to ARC
and BRC. Thus, as we interpret the parties' stipulation, the
evidence presented in Estate of Cook that would be relevant to
ARC, BRC and IRC alike (not including perhaps the testimony of
Dr. Charles Altschuler, on which the Court does not rely) would
be considered as evidence in the instant cases and could be
considered in resolving the IRC issues for 1979. We do not
construe the parties' stipulation to limit the evidence here to
only those portions of the Estate of Cook case's evidentiary
record that Kanter considers "relevant" to IRC and himself.
On this record, we conclude that respondent has established
that Kanter was not entitled to deduct the claimed 1979 IRC
research and development expenses under section 174(a). The
evidence shows that there was no realistic prospect of IRC's
entering into a trade or business to exploit the technology
relating to the NPT-15392 compound being developed under the IRC-
Newport R&D and License Agreement because there was essentially
nothing that IRC could acquire. Virtually anything that Newport
developed would almost certainly be a patentable property right
that ipso facto could not be owned by IRC. In Estate of Cook
Page: Previous 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011