Appeal No. 94-2861
Application 08/013,537
3. The composition of matter as defined by Claim 1, said
deodorant (b) comprising a polyoxyethylene, polyoxypropylene or
poly(oxyethylene)/(oxypropylene) ester of undecylenic acid.
In addition to the admitted prior art found in the present
specification, the examiner relies upon the following references
as evidence of obviousness:
Thomas E. Furia and Nicoló Bellanca (Furia), 2 Fenaroli’s
Handbook of Flavor Ingredients (2d ed., CRC Press, Inc., 1975)
Arctander, Steffen, II Perfume and Flavor Chemicals (1969)
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to a composition
comprising an animal foodstuff and a deodorizing amount of at
least one alkyl or polyoxyalkylene ester of undecylenic acid.
According to appellants, the “undecylenic acid ester compounds
have been found to mask the odor of objectional foodstuffs
without producing an odor of their own” (page 3 of Brief).
Appellants submit at page 4 of the Brief that “only claims
3-4 and 14-15 is [sic: are] separately argued.” Accordingly,
claims 1, 2, 5-13 and 16-20 stand or fall together.
Appealed claims 1-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over the admitted state of the art in view of
Arctander and Furia.
Upon careful consideration of the opposing arguments
presented on appeal, as well as appellants’ declaration evidence
of nonobviousness, we will sustain the examiner’s rejection of
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007