Appeal No. 96-0700
Application No. 08/153,550
The Jaffe declaration which characterizes the tetrabromo
product of Christmann as a dye instead of a pigment is of little
probative value in establishing the nonobviousness of the claimed
process. The declaration includes no objective evidence that
either the claimed process or its product is unexpectedly
different than the process or product of Christmann. The
statement that workers under Dr. Jaffe's supervision failed in
their attempt to prepare a tetrafluoro compound by a process that
is analogous to the one disclosed in Christmann is mostly
irrelevant to the process of preparing the tetrabromo compound
disclosed in Christmann and the tetrachloro compound presently
claimed. Furthermore, the declaration provides no specifics
regarding the "analogous" process performed by the workers. We
note that appellants state at page 3 of their Reply Brief that
some of the criticisms of the Jaffe declaration set forth in the
Examiner's Answer may have merit, and "[a]ppellants did not rely
on this declaration for any position set forth in the Appeal
Brief."
Conspicuously absent in the present record is any side-by-
side comparative evidence between the claimed product and either
the tetrabromo yellow to red pigments of Christmann or yellow
pigments of Hein's EXAMPLE 15. As a result, appellants have
presented no comparative evidence with the closest prior art that
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007