Whether references qualify as prior art is left for trial
Ampex Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co. et al., No. 04-1373-KAJ, Nov. 2, 2006.
Jordan, J. Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment that certain evidence cannot qualify as prior art is denied.
The technology relates to digital cameras. Ampex argues that defendants cannot prove Quantel’s PaintBox is prior art because they cannot corroborate the oral testimony they rely on. Numerous factual issues exist which preclude summary judgment. The motion is thus denied. A second prior art reference is more problematic. The examiner found that there was inadequate description of the memory replacement control, and the applicant although contending that one skilled in the art needed no further explanation, abandoned that claim. Ampex argues that defendants cannot now take a position that was abandoned. The court found issues of fact which precluded summary judgment, but also ordered the parties to submit a jury verdict form which would make known whether the jury relied on that reference.
