Ex parte CALVIN - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1997-0092                                                        
          Application No. 08/215,015                                                  

               additional grape juice blended with the low-sugar                      
          fraction prior to fermentation, said additional grape juice                 
          providing sugar for fermentation.                                           
                              THE REFERENCES OF RECORD                                
          As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon the                    
          following references:                                                       
          Gogel               4,156,026                May  22, 1979                  
          Lang et al. (Lang) 4,902,518                 Feb. 20, 1990                  
          Thumm               4,942,045                Jul. 17, 1990                  
                                    THE REJECTION                                     
          Claims 7, 8, 10, 11, 14 and 15 stand rejected under 35                      
          U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Lang in view of Thumm, and                
          Gogel.                                                                      
                                       OPINION                                        
          As an initial matter, appellant’s Brief is devoid of any                    
          statement that the claims rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 do                 
          not stand or fall together.  See Brief, page 3.  Accordingly,               
          we select claim 11, one of the independent product claims, as               
          representative of appellant’s invention and limit our                       
          consideration to said claim.  37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7) 1995.                    
               We have carefully considered appellant’s arguments for                 
          patentability.  However, we are in complete agreement with the              
          examiner that the claimed subject matter is unpatentable in                 

                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007