Appeal No. 2001-1489 Page 11
Application No. 09/177,695
first to be followed by the other creams. It follows that the cleansing cream
“complements” the foundation and night creams by providing the cleansing function the
other creams rely upon but do not possess. Accordingly, on that basis, we would agree
that the claimed complementary products do not distinguish over the prior art
combination.
If the two limitations of claim 1 not addressed in the present grounds of rejection
are subsequently addressed in accordance with the discussion above, there would be
substantial evidence to establish a prima facie case of obviousness under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 for claim 1 over the cited art combination. In particular, a rejection of claim 1
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the Jacqueline Cochran Advertisement alone would appear
to present a substantial question of patentability. We are satisfied that the illustration in
the Jacqueline Cochran Advertisement of jars of cleansing cream, foundation cream,
night cream, rouge, and powder, “fitted together” in that order, is otherwise a disclosure
of at least two compositions with different active ingredients stored independently of
each other in separate containers joined together for use in a skin treatment regime
whereby each composition is applied one after the other for their respective benefits.
Claim 2 further limits the claim 1 method by requiring the containers to be “fitted
with a means for coupling same to one another.” The Jacqueline Cochran
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007