Appeal No. 2006-1544
Application 10/024,621
the claim limitation relating to a prediction correlating the use of
at least one beauty product with a predicted future occurrence.
Accordingly, we sustain the rejection of claims 21 through 23 and 48
through 50 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
To summarize: the examiner’s rejection of claims 1 through 69
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as failing to comply with
the enablement requirement is not sustained, however, the rejections
of claims 1, 4 through 6, 9 through 15, 17 through 20, 24 through
27, 29 through 36, 43 through 47, 51 through 53, 56, 59 through 62
and 64 through 67 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by
Maloney, of claims 2, 3, 7, 8, 16, 28, 37 through 42, 54, 55, 57,
58, 63, 68 and 69 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on Maloney in view
of Shim, and of claims 21 through 23 and 48 through 50 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Maloney in view of Shim,
Williams and Nordbye are sustained.
Since at least one rejection of each of the claims on appeal
has been sustained, it follows that the decision of the examiner is
affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection
with this appeal may be extended under CFR § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
AFFIRMED
14
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007