Appeal 2007-1156
Application 10/459,070
Trinh [ ], Franklin [ ] and Ha [ ] teach a cosmetic composition
having a structurant, and Motley [ ] teaches that the salts of the
fatty acids are suitable as structurants for application to skin.
Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been
motivated to provide the structurant of Motley [ ] in the
composition of Trinh [ ], Franklin [ ] and Ha [ ], with the
expectation of providing a suitable structurant for a cosmetic
composition.
(Answer 13-14.)
Motley, however, simply teaches that gellants include “fatty alcohols,
esters of fatty alcohols, fatty acids, amides of fatty acids, esters or ethers of
fatty acids including triglycerides, ethoxylated fatty alcohols, ethoxylated
fatty acids, corresponding salts thereof, combinations thereof, and other
crystalline gellants known or otherwise effective in providing the desired
crystalline matrix within the antiperspirant composition.” (Col. 14, ll. 8-15.)
Motley, however, does not specifically teach or exemplify using a C10-C22
fatty acid and a salt of the fatty acid.
As noted by Appellants, in Examples 8 and 9 of Ha, stearic acid is at
0.10% (0.000352 mole) and sodium hydroxide is at 0.013% (0.000325
mole), and thus according to Appellants the sodium hydroxide would
neutralize the stearic acid to produce sodium stearate, with no fatty acid
remaining (Br. 11). The Examiner appears to agree (Br. 11), as Motley was
added to teach the use of a fatty acid and the fatty acid salt (Answer 13).
[A] patent composed of several elements is not proved obvious
merely by demonstrating that each of its elements was,
independently, known in the prior art. Although common sense
directs one to look with care at a patent application that claims
as innovation the combination of two known devices according
to their established functions, it can be important to identify a
reason that would have prompted a person of ordinary skill in
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013