Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
34 F.3d 1058 (1994)
Scott (plaintiff) and Finney (defendant) each filed patent applications claiming a penile implant, where Finney was the senior party, having filed a parent patent application May 15, 1980, and Scott was the junior party, having a priority date of May 15, 1981. An interference proceeding before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences was held. Prior to this interference, however, the parties had engaged in another interference proceeding to a broader subject matter of penile implants, and Scott had been awarded priority. The present interference, however, involved a narrowed invention. Scott attempted to show prior reduction to practice. The Board held that Scott failed to show sufficient testing after conception to determine if the invention actually worked. In the absence of evidence that Scott tested his invention to ensure that it functioned, the Board awarded priority to Finney as the senior party. Scott appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Rader, C.J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 236,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.