Appeal 2006-2551
Application 09/423,911
With regard to the suppression of recrystallization, the Examiner finds that
Daly teaches this step using hot roll exit temperatures of 249-405 ºC., which
range entirely encompasses the claimed range of 260-280 ºC. (Answer 6).
Additionally, the Examiner finds that Daly teaches selection of a
temperature range that would prevent recrystallization completely for the
gauges employed, especially in the last hot rolling passes (id.). From these
findings, the Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in this art at the time of Appellants’ invention to select a
portion of the hot rolling exit temperature range taught by Daly for the last
few hot rolling passes with the expectation of suppressing or avoiding
recrystallization (Answer 6-7).
The Examiner additionally applies JP ‘896 for its teaching to “warm”
roll aluminum alloy sheets at a low temperature of 100-350 ºC. to produce
an alloy sheet excellent in deep drawability and formability (Answer 9).
Therefore the Examiner relies on JP ‘896 as additional evidence for the
obviousness of using low hot rolling exit temperatures (id.).
Appellants argue that Daly does not teach or suggest the criticality of
maintaining the claimed range of exit temperatures, merely preferring to
avoid recrystallization while disclosing that the exit temperature may be
above 332 ºC. (Br. 4-5; Reply Br. 2).
These arguments are not well taken. Appellants admit that Daly
teaches that recrystallization should be minimized or reduced (Br. 5).
However, as correctly stated by the Examiner (Answer 6), Daly further
teaches that “all hot line recrystallization at gauges below 1.90 cm (0.75
inch) or 1.27 cm (0.5 inch) is avoided” (col. 3, ll. 41-43, italics added). The
Examiner also finds that such gauges are shown in the examples of Daly
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007