Appeal No. 1998-0187
Application No. 08/247,518
occur over the entire claimed range. See In re Clemens, 622
F.2d 1029, 1035, 206 USPQ 289, 296 (CCPA 1980). In this
instance, the objective evidence of nonobviousness is solely
directed to the unexpected results obtained by the manufacture
of cups on a commercial scale. It is our view, however, that
claim 8 is not limited to the production of cups on a
commercial scale, but includes within its scope the
manufacture of one or a small number of cups. We do not find
and the appellant has not directed our attention to any
evidence in the record establishing that the manufacture of a
few cups by the process defined in claim 8 has any unexpected
cost benefit over the manufacture of a like number of cups by
the conventional process. For the foregoing reasons, the
appellant’s evidence of unexpected cost benefits can be
accorded little weight.
As to the opinions in the above-noted declarations that5
cups made by the claimed process are superior in appearance,
5As with the assertion of unexpected cost benefits, the
statements regarding unexpected improvements in the quality of
the cups produced by the claimed process are unsupported by
any factual data either in the specification or in the
declarations comparing cups produced by the claimed process to
cups produced by any prior art process.
15
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007