Appeal No. 1997-3389
Application No. 08/449,956
is unpersuasive for the reasons set forth in our decision in
Appeal No. 97-3332.
Those reasons are repeated below for completeness.
According to appellants and the Mazzola Declaration, this
evidence demonstrates that a Neodol 23-3 based surfactant
blend contributes improved cold water residue properties to a
carbonate-based laundry detergent in comparison with a Neodol
25-3 based surfactant blend as used in the working examples of
the Mazzola patent. However, appellants have failed to1
explain how they arrived at that conclusion based on the data
reported in their specification on page 18 (Example II).
Appellants have the burden of explaining the relevance and
significance of the data presented. See In re Borkowski, 505
F.2d 713, 719, 184 USPQ 29, 33 (CCPA 1974).
Appellants have failed to explain the relevance of the
data upon which they rely. As we see it, in comparative
Example II none of the samples listed in the Table on page 18
of the specification appear to correspond to either Neodol 23-
1According to appellants' specification (page 8 and 11),
Neodol 23-3 is a mixture of ethoxylated C C alcohols;
12- 13
whereas Neodol 25-3 is a mixture of ethoxylated C -C
12 15
alcohols.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007