Appeal No. 94-0591
Application 07/755,610
Babayan and Wruble. However, the examiner has not explained
where Wruble describes an oil-in-water emulsion encompassed by
appellant’s claims or would have reasonably suggested that
persons having ordinary skill in the art make and use a lipid
emulsion appellant claims. Accordingly, on this record, we find
that the combined teachings of Bilton, Wruble and Babayan would
not have led persons having ordinary skill in the art to the
invention appellant claims and must reverse the rejection of all
claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Wruble teaches that the edible unsaturated oils which
constitute the oil phase of his oil-in-water emulsions for oral
administration (Wruble, col. 2, l. 10-14):
include, for example, olive, palm, cottonseed, peanut,
soybean, sesame, corn, sunflower seed, linseed, rapeseed,
sardine, menhaden, tung, safflower, poppyseed, rice bran,
almond, wheat germ oils, and the like.
However, Wruble indicates that oily dispersions may be prepared
from the unsaturated fatty acids apart from the oils (Wruble,
col. 2, l. 14-15). We find that Wruble expresses a distinct
preference for using “edible unsaturated oils having substantial
percentages of linoleic acid, for example, soybean oil, safflower
oil, corn oil, sunflower seed oil, and mixtures thereof” (Wruble,
col. 2, l. 15-19). Combined with the teachings of Bilton and
Babayan with regard to the fatty acid content of the same oils,
we find no reasonable suggestion in Wruble to reduce the amount
- 11 -
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007