Appeal 2007-2207
Application 10/181,810
have found it obvious to incorporate such elements in the alloy composition
in view of the expressed teaching of JP '131. In our view, the combined
teachings of the prior art, as a whole, lead to an affirmative answer to the
question.
Appellants make the argument that "according to the present
invention, high strength and high r-value are achieved by establishing a ratio
of V and Ti and/or Nb contents in relation to C contents [and] [t]here is no
need to conduct complicated annealing processes as required by JP '226 and
JP '131" (Br. 7, third para.). However, as properly explained by the
Examiner, this argument is not germane to the subject matter presently on
appeal. The claimed subject matter is not directed to a process for forming
cold rolled steel, with or without particular annealing steps, but, rather, the
appealed claims define the composition and properties of the steel sheet
itself. It is Appellants' burden to demonstrate that steel sheets within the
broad scope of the appealed claims are unexpectedly different from, and
nonobvious over, the cold rolled steel sheets that one of ordinary skill in the
art would have formulated from the combined teachings of the applied
references. This Appellants have not done. We also note that the appealed
claims encompass steel sheets formed by the annealing processes of JP '226
and JP '131.
As for separately argued claim 27, the claimed ranges for the amounts
of C and Mn, 0.038 - 0.05 and 2.49 - 2.8, respectively, are totally embraced
by the ranges disclosed by JP '226, namely, 0.005 - 0.15 and 1.6 - 3.0,
respectively.
Regarding Appellants' arguments with respect to examples of JP '226
comprising certain elements outside the claimed ranges, it is well settled that
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013