Appeal 2007-1135
Application 09/986,264
to receive the fluid filled reservoir (Gruenbacher, col. 4, ll. 41-50;
see generally Answer 6).
The rejection of claims 1-40:
Claims 1-40 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over the combination of Bechmann and Beck.
In view of the combined teachings of Bechmann and Beck the
Examiner concludes that it would have been prima facie obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine
Beck’s teachings of a cosmetic article wherein agents contained within
chambers are released onto a substrate which is then wetted with water, with
Bechmann’s teaching of liquid containing capsules which would, when
burst, wet the substrate as required by Beck (Answer 4-5).
Claim 1:
Appellant groups and argues claims 1-13, 24, 24, and 27-30 together;
therefore these claims will stand or fall together. 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.37(c)(1)(vii). Accordingly, we limit our discussion to representative
claim 1. Claim 1 is directed to a cosmetic article. The cosmetic article
comprises three components:
(a) a substrate;
(b) a cosmetic composition associated with said substrate; and
(c) at least one breakable liquid containing capsule associated with
said substrate.
According to claim 1, when the breakable liquid containing capsule(s)
are broken the liquid wets the cosmetic composition.
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013