Appeal No. 96-2810
Application 08/017,086
faster and provided a thicker glaze coating which displayed a
lower tendency to run or sag as well as containing fewer foam
bubbles” (Spec., p. 6) is conclusory in nature. Conclusory
statements in the specification which are not supported by
factual evidence are entitled to little weight. In re
Lindner, 457 F.2d 506, 508, 173 USPQ 356, 358 (CCPA 1972).
Finally, while appellants argue that the results in the
specification show that appellants’ “Invention Preparation
. . . displayed . . . fewer foam bubbles” (Spec., p. 6),
lawyer’s arguments which are not supported by factual evidence
of record also are entitled to very little weight. In re
Lindner, supra. The specification more correctly teaches
(Spec., p. 6):
. . . [F]ewer fired articles sprayed with the
Invention
Preparation contained objectional pinholes or runs such
that rework was required . . . .
. . . .
Visual inspection of both the control and
experimental
tiles revealed overall superior quality for the glaze
containing hydrophobically modified hydroxyethylcellulose
associative thickener.
Based on the evidence in the specification, we find that
somewhat less than 50% of the articles appellants produced by
- 13 -
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007