Appeal No. 2003-1266
Application No. 09/735,054
materially affect the softness and crunchiness of the coated gum
center.
Accordingly, we reverse the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph.
Rejection of claims 1-5, 8-10, 13, 14, 16, 17 and 20
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Reed ‘453
We need to address only claim 1, which is the broadest
independent product claim, and independent method claim 13.
Reed ‘453 discloses a chewing gum product comprising a
center having a water-soluble portion and a water-insoluble
portion (col. 2, lines 38-48). The center can include
hydrogenated starch hydrolysate (col. 3, lines 14 and 38-39) and
can be free of glycerin and sorbitol solution (col. 3, lines 26-
27). The center is coated with a syrup containing hydrogenated
isomaltulose (col. 2, lines 18-22).
The appellants argue that “Reed’s exhaustive list of
ingredients fails to provide one skilled in the art with the
necessary level of teaching and/or motivation to arrive at the
specific features of the claimed invention” (reply brief,
page 2), and that “[b]ecause Reed fails to disclose each and
every element of the claimed invention, namely, the inclusion of
hydrogenated starch hydrolysate and the exclusion of glycerin and
Page 5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007