Appeal No. 1999-0997
Application No. 08/397,141
however, the amount of cationic polymer applied is relatively small compared to
the amount of pigment. “[T]he upper limit of the quantity of cationic polymer is
sufficiently low for the particles to retain their individuality and their shape. In
other words, the cationic polymer forms, at most, one thin (optionally lacunar)
layer on the coated particles.” Page 5, lines 4-8.
Discussion
The examiner rejected all of the claims as anticipated by the disclosure of
Guillon and barred by the doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting by the
claims of Guillon. (Guillon and the instant application share the same assignee.)
The instant claims are directed to a cosmetic composition containing “organic
particles” (i.e., pigment particles) which are introduced into the composition “in
the form of particles whose surface is coated with at least one cationic polymer.”
That is, the claimed composition comprises organic particles made up of a core
of pigment coated with a layer of cationic polymer.
Guillon discloses and claims cosmetic compositions comprising pigment
and a cationic polymer. In Guillon’s composition, however, the cationic polymer
does not form a thin layer on the coated particles, as in the instantly claimed
compositions. Rather, the cationic polymer is chemically reacted with the
pigment, so that pigment molecules are bound to the polymer via a salification
reaction. See column 1, lines 57-61 (“These new colored pigments result
essentially from the salification reaction between an acid dye, or its salt, and a
polymer having salified primary or secondary amine functions or quaternized
tertiary amine functions.”).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007