The issue in In re Steed:The principal issue on appeal is whether Steed antedatedthe Evans reference in accordance with the requirementsand law implemented by Rule 131, for Steedbears the burden to establish “facts . . . in character andweight, as to establish reduction to practice prior to theeffective date of the reference, or conception of the inventionprior to the effective date of the reference coupledwith due diligence from prior to said date to a subsequentreduction to practice or to the filing of the application.”37 C.F.R. § 1.131(b). Steed argues that the Declarationand exhibits meet the requirements of either actualreduction to practice or conception plus diligence.There was no waiver:The Board held that “assertions that the claimed inventionwas actually reduced to practice in December of1997, and at the latest by August of 2000 are not set forthin the Appeal Brief or the Reply Brief, and are thusconsidered waived.” Bd. Op. at 6. We…
↧