Appeal 2007-0127
Application 09/749,916
1 The Appellants’ arguments are inapposite. The Examiner has
2 established a prima facie case of obviousness. As we have discussed, the
3 Appellants have failed to come forward with sufficient credible evidence to
4 overcome that case. Even had we accepted the Appellants’ arguments that
5 unexpected results had been established for wafers 0.25 inches and thicker,
6 that evidence would have to be weighed against the evidence of
7 obviousness, including Uwai. The Appellants appear to have
8 misunderstood the application of the Uwai reference. Uwai is relied upon as
9 additional evidence to support the Examiner’s position that the results
10 pointed to by the Appellants are unexpected in that thicker electrodes
11 generally are more stable. Uwai describes that principle to one of ordinary
12 skill in the art. (Uwai, col. 2, ll. 62-63). Accordingly, we agree with the
13 Examiner that Uwai tends to show that the results are expected.
14 The Appellants urge that the data points in Appendix B (Cracked
15 versus OK) are sufficient because one of ordinary skill in the art could
16 readily ascertain the trend in the data and reasonably allow him or her to
17 extend its probative value. (Br., p. 14, ll. 5-8).
18 We disagree. There are only three data points on the chart, and
19 without sufficient explanation to which line is “line A”, or an indication as
20 to which points define which results, the evidence is unpersuasive. If the
21 two data points nearest the line are the only successes, then a rule is being
22 extrapolated from the barest minimum of possible data. In any event, this
23 argument goes to the weight to be accorded to the evidence, and we find that
24 it is to be entitled to very little weight for the reasons discussed above.
24
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013