In Re Francis J.A.M.C. De Blauwe and Frank K.A. Selleslags

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a claim of unexpected results failed because, inter alia, the patentee did not compare the claimed results with those achieved without the invention nor did it compare the patented device with the most similar prior art
• stating that \[a] proper showing of unexpected results will rebut a prima facie case of obviousness\
• “Mere lawyer’s arguments and eonclusory statements in the specification, unsupported by objective evidence, are insufficient to establish unexpected results.”
• “A proper showing of unexpected results will rebut a prima facie case of obviousness.”
• “A proper showing of unexpected results will rebut a prima facie case of obviousness.”
• “It is true that the Solicitor cannot raise a new ground of rejection or apply a new rationale to support a rejection in appeals from decisions of the board.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).