Appeal No. 1998-0558
Application No. 08/564,942
increase the pressure of the hydrogen-rich fraction by
regulating a hydrogen makeup stream and by eliminating a vapor
purge of the hydrogen-rich fraction.
Appellant relies upon a declaration by the present
inventor as evidence of nonobviousness, i.e., unexpected
results.
However, we agree with the examiner that the probative value
of
appellant's declaration is considerably less than that
required to establish unexpected results for processes within
the scope of the appealed claims. For one, the declaration
evidence is hardly commensurate in scope with the degree of
protection sought by the appealed claims. In re Grasseli, 713
F.2d 731, 743, 218 USPQ 769, 778 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re
Clemens, 622 F.2d 1029, 1036, 206 USPQ 289, 296 (CCPA 1980).
The declaration fails to establish that the myriad of
reactions encompassed by the appealed claims would, as a
class, demonstrate unexpectedly low aryl ring loss. In re
12
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007