Appeal No. 95-4721
Application No. 08/128,332
probative value of the declaration is not commensurate in
scope with the degree of protection sought by the appealed
claims. In re Grasselli,
713 F.2d 731, 743, 218 USPQ 769, 778 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re
Clemens, 622 F.2d 1029, 1036, 206 USPQ 289, 296 (CCPA 1980).
Example 1 of the specification that is reported in the
declaration uses a temperature of 180EC which is considerably
above the lower limit of the claimed range of 100EC. While
appellants contend at page 7 of their principal Brief that
180EC is representative of the claimed range of 100E-220EC, no
factual basis is offered for this conclusion. If, as
appellants argue, it is unexpected that the claimed amination
of an aryl halide gives high yields at a temperature as low as
180EC, it is reasonable to require appellants to demonstrate
that a similar unexpected yield would result at a temperature
that is considerably lower than 180EC, viz., at the claimed
100EC. In our view, the single temperature used in the
declaration does not establish unexpected results for the
claimed range which substantially coincides with the preferred
temperature range disclosed by Dix. In re Greenfield, 571
F.2d 1185, 1188,
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007