Appeal No. 1997-0461
Application 08/267,683
claimed compositions are intended to be used in a process
employing higher pressure and temperatures than encountered in
the process disclosed by the Fujii et al. references. In the
first instance, as correctly noted by the examiner, the
subject matter claimed is not a process but a composition. By
analogy, the composition of aspirin remains the same whether
used in a method for treating headaches or when used as a
prophylactic against stroke.
Further, there is absolutely no evidence in this record
comparing the temperatures and pressures in the prior art
processes with the temperatures and pressures in appellant's
disclosed broaching process. Whether, for example, in a
process of broaching a soft metal such as brass or aluminum
appellant reaches the temperatures and pressures reached by
Fujii et al. when cold working titanium, for example, is
complete conjecture by appellant. Accordingly, we give
appellant's arguments concerning the differences in the
processes the weight of mere attorney argument. We find
absolutely no merit to appellant's tangential argument at page
7 of his main brief that the Fujii et al. references are
"entirely nonanalogous to the present lubricant/coolant
12
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007