Corroboration of reduction to practice must corroborate that invention worked for intended purpose

In a decision today, the Federal Circuit affirmed the BPAI's decision in an interference proceeding awarding priority to the senior party.  The junior party attempted to show an actual reduction to practice before the senior party's priority date.

While the junior party offered evidence of an earlier actual reduction to practice, the corroborating evidence was insufficient.  The corroborating witness just stated that he saw the device in question in the junior party's laboratory.  There was no corroborating evidence that the device actually worked for its intended purpose, and so the corroboration was insufficient to establish an earlier reduction to practice.  As a result, the court affirmed the decision to award priority to the senior party.

More detail of In re Garner after the jump.

[More]

Inventors' appreciation of invention intones interference's inversion

On appeal from the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI), the Federal Circuit today reversed a priority determination, finding that the junior party had shown conception and reduction to practice before the senior party's filing date.  As a result, the case was remanded to determine whether the senior party could prove earlier priority.

More details of the case after the jump.

[More]

BlogCFC was created by Raymond Camden. This blog is running version 5.8.001.