Appeal 2007-1135
Application 09/986,264
As to the breakable capsule, Bechmann teaches at least one breakable
liquid containing capsule associated with a substrate (FF 1) that, when
broken, spreads onto the absorbent material, thereby wetting the substrate
(FF 2-3).
Based on this evidence we find that a person of ordinary skill in the
art would recognize that Bechmann’s liquid containing capsules can be
associated with and used to wet Beck’s substrate layers and the portions
thereof. See KSR, 127 S. Ct. at 1741, 82 USPQ2d at 1396 (It is proper to
“take account of the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary
skill in the art would employ.”). See also id. at 1742, 82 USPQ2d at 1397
(“A person of ordinary skill is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an
automaton.”). Therefore, we find no error in the Examiner’s rejection of
claim 14. Accordingly, we affirm the rejection of claim 14 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over the combination of Bechmann and Beck.
Claims 15-23 and 26 fall together with claim 14.
Claim 31:
Appellant groups and argues claims 31 and 35-40 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 31. Claim 31 is
drawn to a cosmetic product that comprises:
(a) a container; and
(b) at least one cosmetic article disposed in the container.
In addition, claim 31, requires that the cosmetic product comprises:
(i) a substrate; and
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013