Appeal No. 2006-1759 Παγε 10
Application No. 09/984,184
Rejections under § 103(a)
Concerning the examiner’s obviousness rejection of claims
1-50 and 52-69 over the combination of Collin and Mellul,
appellants argue the so rejected claims as a group. Thus, we
select claim 1 as the representative claim on which we shall
decide this appeal as to this ground of rejection.
Appellants do not contest the examiner’s determination that
Collin teaches or suggests a cosmetic composition useful in
treating keratin fibers comprising a physiologically acceptable
medium including an aqueous phase, at least one fiber and an
aqueous dispersion of wax particles. Rather appellants focus on
the claim 1 requirement that the wax dispersion is a micro
dispersion in arguing for the patentability of the rejected
claims.
As for the required micro dispersion of wax particles, the
examiner turns to Mellul in combination with Collin. In this
regard, Mellul, like Collin, discloses cosmetic compositions
useful in hair care or treating eyelashes. Mellul (column 1,
lines 27-47) discloses that it is known that micro dispersions of
waxes can be maintained in water and used in a variety of
applications, including hair care. Mellul teaches or suggests
that the addition of partially fluorinated lipophilic
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007