Appeal 2007-0315
Application 10/374,300
“When oily substances are used as the carrier, the content of the oily
substance [is in] a range from 0.01 to 50% by weight. See [Jokura, at]
column 4, lines 14-16. When water, ethanol and/or water-soluble polyhydric
alcohols are employed as the carrier, the content is preferably from 0.01 to
95% by weight. See [Jokura, at] column 4, lines 30-35” (Answer 4). The
amount of carrier in Jokura’s cosmetic composition therefore overlaps with
the limitation in claim 1 of “from about 1 to about 99.9% by weight of a
cosmetically acceptable carrier.”
Jokura teaches that its skin cosmetic has a pH of 3-10 (Jokura, at col.
3, ll. 61-63; Answer 4), which overlaps with “a pH ranging from about 1.8 to
6.5” as required by claim 1.
Obviousness in view of Jokura
Having established the presence of all elements of claim 1 in Jokura,
the Examiner finds that the difference between Jokura’s composition and the
claimed composition is that Jokura does not describe the salt as “present as a
half neutralized and a fully neutralized acid in a molar ratio ranging from
about 1000:1 to about 1:1000” as recited in claim 1 (Answer 4-5). In
contrast, Jokura describes the molar ratio of the acid (B) to the salt (C)
(“fully neutralized acid”) as falling preferably “within a range of from 1/9 to
9/1, still preferably from 2/8 to 8/2” (Jokura, at col. 3, ll. 55-60).
The Examiner contends that the claimed ratio would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art “since partial or full neutralization
of the acid by the salt (salt acts as the neutralizing agent) adjusts the pH of
the composition” (Answer 4). Thus, “a skilled artisan would have been
motivated to use a sufficient amount of salt to either partially or fully
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013