Appeal No. 1995-5117
Application No. 08/067,154
scope than the here claimed subject matter relative to the
number of compounds under consideration.
The declaration evidence is also considerably more narrow
in scope than the rejected claims in relation to the
properties discussed in the declaration. That is, of the
three properties discussed in the declaration (i.e., optical
anisotropy or birefringence, dielectric anisotropy and nematic
phase ranges), only two are required by the rejected claims
(i.e., birefringence and dielectric anisotropy). Further in
this regard, while the declaration emphasizes that single
inventive compounds possess all three of these properties, the
claims under review not only address merely two of these three
properties but require only that these properties be displayed
by the liquid crystal mixture rather than by a single compound
within the scope of the recited formula. The significance of
these comments regarding the properties discussed in the
appellants’ declaration is emphasized by the fact that many of
the declaration noninventive compounds (see compounds Nos. 8,
10, 11, 13, 14 and 15 on declaration pages 3 and 4) exhibit at
least two properties which correspond to those exhibited by
the tested inventive compounds (i.e., see compound Nos. 7 and
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007