Appeal No. 2005-1738 Page 2
Application No. 10/046,897
The examiner relies upon the following references:
Owades 4,170,638 Oct. 9, 1979
Barney et al. (Barney) 5,370,863 Dec. 6, 1994
Shibata et al. (Shibata)1 JP 172332 Jul. 7, 1989
Claims 1-8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious over
Shibata. In addition, claims 1-8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being obvious over the combination of Owades and Shibata, and claims 1-7
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over the combination of Barney with
Shibata. After careful review of the record and consideration of the issues before
us, we reverse all of the rejections of record.
DISCUSSION
Claims 1-8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious over
Shibata.
Shibata is cited for teaching “a method for treating mastitis in a cows using
a water based extract of a solution comprising hops (Humulus lupulus).”
Examiner’s Answer, page 3. The reference is also cited for teaching that the
solution may be used in the form of a dispersion, and that the solution may be
administered through the skin. According to the examiner, Shibata “teaches a
method of killing pathogens by applying an aqueous hops solution to the skin of
cows.” Id. at 4.
1 Translation dated September 26, 2003, a copy of which is attached to the Supplemental
Request for Reconsideration.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007