Appeal No. 95-3981
Application 08/099,880
facie obviousness. In other words, the prior art placed no significance on the molecular
weight of the polyvinyl alcohol to be used for the purposes of the compositions
disclosed in those references. Rather, it was only upon appellant’s disclosure of this
invention that the significance of the molecular weight of the polyvinyl alcohol became
known. Appellant has tested near the outer extremes of the claimed range of molecular
weights of polyvinyl alcohol. The examiner has not disputed that the results shown
would have been considered unexpected by one of ordinary skill in the art. On this
record, we see no reason why appellant should provide any further comparisons.
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Remand
By its own terms, claim 1 is directed to a composition for forming a peelable
cosmetic mask which comprises the two stated polymers. In rejecting the claims in the
Examiner’s Answer, the examiner states at page 3 that:
The instant application is claiming cosmetic mask comprising (i)
polyvinyl alcohol (ii) hydrophobically modified acrylate or methacrylate
copolymer (iii) C -C monohydric alcohol (iv) water.
1 3
The examiner has misinterpreted the scope of claim 1 on appeal in two significant
aspects. First, the examiner has interpreted the statement of intended use in claim 1
“for forming a peelable cosmetic mask” as meaning that the claim is directed to a
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007