Appeal No. 1997-2958 18
Application No. 08/401,719
As to the subject matter of claim 4, we find an unrebutted prima facie case of obviousness has
been established.
Dependent Claim 5
Claim 5 is dependent on claim 4 and further requires performing the rolling and final annealing
steps such that a crystalline structure of the rolled plate is a non-recrystallized crystal structure, the 90°
critical bending radius is 7.5 times or less a plate thickness, and a yield strength ratio before and after
the final annealing is at least 70%.
Appellants state that these limitations are not disclosed or made obvious by Komatsubara.
The examiner notes in the answer that the process steps of the claims are performed within the
parameters of Komatsubara and that appellants have not established that any values for the bending
radius and yield strength ratio are, in fact, any different than the corresponding values would be in
Komatsubara or that the values would not be apparent from Komatsubara.
In the reply brief at pages 2 and 3, appellants argue that final annealing according to appellants’
process is necessary in order to achieve the desired cold bending property, i.e. the 90° critical bending
radius. Appellants, in the brief at pages 13 and 18, also argue that the yield strength ratio before and
after annealing and the 90° critical bending radius are interdependent with final annealing. In the brief at
page 19, appellants refer us to Tables A-C as objective evidence to support this argument.
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007