Appeal No. 2006-2781
Application 10/254,671
to the presence of a complex carbide (i.e., (Nb,V)C) which is not present in
Kawano’s steel. Reply 7.
The relevance of this argument is not clearly understood since
Kawano is not limited to a TaV-containing steel. As pointed out by the
Examiner, Kawano discloses a composite steel which may contain
0.05 to 0.5%V and 0.002 to 0.2%Nb, which are ranges encompassed by the
appealed claims. Final Rejection 5 (citing Kawano, col. 7, ll. 54-67 and col.
8, ll. 45-59). Moreover, even if relevant, the argument is unpersuasive in
overcoming the Examiner’s prima facie showing of obviousness as
Appellants have not directed us to any evidence to support their assertion
that the claimed steel has greater stability at high temperatures. See In re De
Blauwe, 736 F.2d 699, 705, 222 USPQ 191, 196 (Fed. Cir. 1984)(“It is well
settled that unexpected results must be established by factual evidence. Mere
argument or conclusory statements in the specification does not suffice.”)
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1, 5-8, 11 and 15-18 as
unpatentable over Kawano is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(iv)(effective Sept.
13, 2004).
AFFIRMED
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007