Ex parte KNUTH et al. - Page 3

          Appeal No. 94-4497                                                          
          Application 07/913,782                                                      

               While the prior art relied upon by the examiner discusses              
          natural vanilla extract, it is not directed to the claimed                  
          cultured vanilla cell extract having a composition different                
          from natural vanilla extract, i.e., because the starting                    
          material (vanilla bean) and the extraction procedure (using                 
          alcohol) disclosed in the applied prior art differs from the                
          starting material (a secreted product from a vanilla plant                  
          cell culture) and the extraction procedure (contacting culture              
          medium with an adsorbent) of the present invention.                         
          Accordingly, we find no basis for the examiner’s conclusion                 
          that the prior art composition “mimics” the claimed subject                 
          matter.  See Figures 3A and 3B.  In addition, the examiner has              
          failed to provide any analysis of the prior art references                  
          which would have led a person having ordinary skill in the art              
          to the claimed subject matter, i.e. a composition wherein the               
          amounts of the first and second sets of vanilla flavor                      
          components present in the extract are different from that of a              
          natural vanilla extract.  In re Brouwer, 77 F.3d 422, 425, 37               
          USPQ2d 1663, 1666 (Fed. Cir. 1996);  In re Ochiai, 71 F.3d                  
          1565, 1570, 37 USPQ2d 1127, 1131 (Fed. Cir. 1995).                          


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007