Ex parte TAKEUCHI et al. - Page 6




          Appeal No. 94-4307                                                           
          Application 07/919,267                                                       


          or suggested by the Japanese reference relied upon by the                    
          examiner.  We find that the examiner has not made out a prima                
          facie case of obviousness over the prior art.  Accordingly, the              
          examiner’s rejection of claims 1-12 under 35 U.S.C.  103 is                 
          reversed.                                                                    
                           Rejection Under 35 U.S.C.  112                             
               The examiner rejected claim 10 on the ground that the                   
          expression “ascorbic acid is substantially absent from said                  
          aqueous solution” does not have descriptive support in the                   
          specification as originally filed.  Appellants argue that support            
          for the expression can be found at page 1, lines 12-19 of the                
          specification wherein appellants state that                                  
               [t]he present inventors have formerly found that, when                  
               [a] negatively-charged substance (e.g. fruit juice and                  
               anionic surface active agent) is present in aqueous                     
               solution of thaumatin, precipitates are formed and that                 
               it is effective to use chitosan for preventing such                     
               precipitation and also to use ascorbic acid and                         
               chitosan together for preventing unpleasant after-taste                 
               of aqueous solution of thaumatin (cf. Japanese Laid-                    
               Open Publication 02/174,649).                                           
          According to appellants, this disclosure plus the discussion of              
          the invention in the specification coupled with the fact that                
          none of the examples in their specification include ascorbic acid            
          “establishes that [the] absence of ascorbic acid, from the                   



                                           6                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007