Appeal No. 95-0523
Application No. 07/885,490
because the use of enzymes in infant formulas
in[sic] conventional in the art.
Applicant is merely using known components
and process steps in order to obtain expected
results, see In re Kerkhoven 205 USPQ 1069 and
In re Gershon 152 USPQ 602.
With respect to claims 24-26 the rejection is silent as
to the enzyme compositions that are set forth in these claims
and how the prior art teachings relate to these compositions.
We are constrained to reverse this rejection with respect to
claims 24-26, in light of the failure of the examiner to
explain which teachings are being relied upon to establish
that these claims would have been obvious over the cited prior
art.
Claims 1-23 require the addition of an enzyme to infant
formulas, however more is required than the mere addition of
enzymes to formula at any stage in production of the formula
or in any form and amount. Claims 1-23 require the enzyme to
be in a "form that will be enzymatically active in the
digestive system of an infant to whom the baby formula is
administered" and further that the enzyme "is present in an
amount effective to completely digest the enzyme substrate in
the formula by the time the substrate reaches the end of the
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007