Appeal No. 1998-2328
Application No. 08/560,138
n.3 (Fed. Cir. 1993). However, the reference as a whole must be
considered, including disclosures teaching away from modifying
the ranges of the reference. See In re Geisler, 116 F.3d at
1469, 43 USPQ2d at 1365. Here Robertson discloses a “broad
range” and a “preferred range” for each component in the
aluminum alloy (col. 5, ll. 55-63). Robertson teaches that
[t]he composition of the present alloy may vary within
the ranges stated but the ranges themselves are
critical, especially those of the primary
alloying elements magnesium and manganese.
Magnesium and manganese together exhibit a
solid solution strengthening effect in
the present alloy. Therefore, it is
essential to provide these elements in
amounts within the stated ranges as well as
in a ratio of magnesium to manganese of
between 1.4:1 and 4.4:1, and in a total
concentration of magnesium and manganese of
2.0-3.3%. [Col. 5, l. 66-col. 6, l. 7,
underlining added].
The examiner recognizes that the amounts of copper and magnesium
recited in the composition of method claims 18 and 19 do not
overlap with those disclosed by Robertson (see the Answer, page
6). Furthermore, the maximum amount of magnesium and manganese
present in the claimed composition is 1.45%, contrasted with the
teaching in Robertson that this total concentration should be
2.0-3.3% (see claims 18 and 19 on appeal and Robertson, col. 6,
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007