Appeal No. 1998-1672
Application No. 08/708,163
broadest claim 25 as clearly made of [sic] record in the
office action mailed on April 16, 1997 in the [sic] second
paragraph”.
In the second paragraph on page 2 of the office action
mailed April 16, 1997, the examiner states the following:
II. There are four independent groups of claims.
They have been considered as being obvious
variants under 35 U.S.C. § 103 to one having
ordinary skill in the art there is no
evidence of the record that they are
patentably distinct. Therefore, no
restriction is made at the present time
until applicant shows or urges otherwise.
In appellant’s response to the office action mailed
April 16, 1997 (i.e., in appellant’s amendment filed on
July 25, 1997), appellant did not comment on the examiner’s
position summarized above, and the examiner did not later
require a restriction in connection with these groups of
claims.
In view of the treatment of claims 8-20, 23, 25, 26
and 27, and noted in the prosecution history summarized
above and in view of the examiner’s position and statement
made in the answer that the claims stand or fall with
broadest claim 25, we consider claim 25 on appeal. We note
that appellant did not object to the examiner’s position
taken in appellant’s reply brief.
The reference relied upon by the examiner is:
Fujimoto et al. (Fujimoto) 4,985,347 Jan. 15, 1991
The subject matter on appeal is reflected in claim 25,
reproduced below:
25. A stabilized color developer solution having
a pH of from about 9.0 to 9.7, and comprising:
a color developing agent present at from about
0.01 to about 0.1 mol/l,
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007