United States Federal Circuit

Although the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences erred in its count construction, its findings that plaintiff's application would not have enabled persons skilled in the art to make and use the transformed tomato plants of the count as of the filing date of the application are affirmed; remand to determine whether plaintiff had shown actual reduction to practice prior to defendant's priority date.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/10/2002
• Published 04/10/2002

Judges

• LINN, Circuit Judge., Before GAJARSA, Circuit Judge, FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and LINN, Circuit Judge.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Oliver R. Ashe, Jr.,Greenblum & Bernstein, P.L.C., of Reston, VA, argued for appellants.   On the brief were Thomas J. Macpeak, Susan J. Mack, Brett S. Sylvester, and Mark A. Hissong, Sughrue, Mion, Zinn, Macpeak & Seas, PLLC, of Washington, DC.


• For Appellees:
  
• Roger W. Parkhurst, Parkhurst & Wendel, L.L.P., of Alexandria, VA, argued for appellees.   With him on the brief was Charles A. Wendel.   Of counsel on the brief was Thomas P. McBride, Jr., Monsanto Company, of St. Louis, MO.