Appeal 2007-0849
Application 10/106,649
f) comparing the value obtained with a control that contains no
perfume.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art reference to show
unpatentability:
Hill US 4,488,973 Dec. 18, 1984
The rejection as presented by the Examiner is as follows:
Claims 18-21 and 23-27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Hill.
We affirm.
DISCUSSION
Claims 18-21 and 23-27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Hill. Claim 18 is drawn to a method for imparting an
anti-microbial activity or enhancing the anti-microbial activity of an article
for personal care or a functional product. Claims 19-21 and 23-27 depend
from claim 18.
The method of claim 18 comprises the single step of adding an
antimicrobial composition that contains at least 30% by weight of one or
more active perfuming ingredients to a personal care article or functional
product2 (see, e.g., Specification 3). According to Appellant’s Specification,
2 Examples of the types of personal care articles and functional products
encompassed by the claimed invention “include soaps, bath and shower gels,
shampoos, deodorants and antiperspirants, cosmetic compositions, air-
fresheners, liquid and solid detergents for the treatment of textiles, fabric
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013