Appeal No. 1998-2941 Page 18
Application No. 08/061,985
Reexamination Control No. 90/003,682
our determination from our review of Dunn's disclosure that 7
Dunn's liquid whole egg complies with the definition of liquid
whole egg set forth in the appellants' specification (column
8, line 54, to column 9, line 9) and the egg solids
requirement found in 7 CFR
§ 59.411(d). Thus, Dunn teaches the product as claimed in8
claim 20.
The appellants argue (brief, pp. 160-161) that the
examiner's application of Dunn in the present application is
inconsistent with the treatment of claims in the related
reissue application (Application No. 07/880,899) and in
another patent application (i.e., Reznik). However, such
argument fails to point out why claim 20 is not anticipated by
Dunn. Additionally, the appellants have not cited any
authority which holds that patentability decisions in other
7See column 4, lines 10-18; column 4, lines 60-65; and
column 21, line 7 to column 24, line 20.
87 CFR § Part 59 was cited by the appellants
(specification, column 9, lines 6-9) as providing the standard
meaning of terms used throughout the specification.
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007