Ex parte PARKS et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1995-4675                                                        
          Application No. 07/875,452                                                  


          whereby the amorphous nylon layer results in enhanced vitamin               
          C retention.                                                                

               The references relied upon by the examiner in the                      
          rejections before us are:                                                   
          Deak                               4,800,129                Jan.            
          24, 1989                                                                    
          Gibbons et al. (Gibbons)           4,921,733                May             
          1, 1990                                                                     
          Tanner et al. (Tanner)        4,988,546                Jan. 29,             
          1991                                                                        
          European patent application   0 381 922                Aug. 16,             
          1990                                                                        
          (Löfgren)                                                                   

               Claims 1 through 3, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35                    
          U.S.C.                                                                      
          § 103 as being unpatentable over Tanner in view of Deak;                    
          claims 4 and 5 are correspondingly rejected over these                      
          references and further in view of Gibbons; and claims 6                     
          through 14, 17 and 18 are correspondingly rejected over all of              
          the aforementioned references in view of the appellants’                    
          “admissions.”                                                               
               In addition, claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.               
          § 102(b) as being anticipated by Löfgren, and claims 3 through              
          18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                 
                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007