Appeal No. 1999-1331
Application No. 08/547,602
Appellant did not renew these arguments, or take issue with the examiner's conclusion
stated in the Final Rejection, in either the Brief or Reply Brief. Thus, these arguments
are not properly before us. 37 CFR § 1.192(a)(1998)("Any arguments or authorities not
included in the brief will be refused consideration by the Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences, unless good cause is shown").
As to the basis for affirmation of the rejection of claim 15, we refer to that portion
of the decision of January 30, 2001 appearing at page 7, first full paragraph which
addresses appealed claim 15, specifically.
As to appellant's arguments concerning the standard applied with respect to the
allegation of unexpected cost savings, we are not persuaded that the standard applied
in our decision of January 30, 2001 was erroneous. To the extent that appellant would
seek to compare the present claimed process to a "hypothetical process" (Request,
page 6), it naturally follows that any comparison of cost savings would of necessarily be
hypothetical and of little persuasive value. We would remind appellant that as set forth
in In re Wright, 999 F.2d 1557, 1563, 27 USPQ2d 1510, 1514-15 (Fed. Cir. 1993),
evidence which is in the nature of unsupported conclusory statements as to the ultimate
legal question is entitled to little if any weight.
We have carefully reviewed the original opinion in light of appellant's request, but
we find no point of law or fact which we overlooked or misapprehended in arriving at our
decision. To the extent relevant, appellant's request amounts to a reargument of points
already considered by the board.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007