Ex parte LEITCH et al. - Page 3




                 Appeal No. 96-0937                                                                                                                     
                 Application 08/203,723                                                                                                                 



                          The references relied upon by the examiner are:                                                                               
                 Bolich, Jr. (Bolich N658)           5,100,658         Mar. 31, 1992 (filed July 16, 1990)                                              

                 Bolich, Jr. (Bolich N646)           5,104,646         Apr. 14, 1992 (filed July 14, 1990)                                              

                          Claims 1, 2, 4 through 6, 8, 11, 12, 14 through 16, 18, and 20 through 26 stand                                               
                                                                                                                          2                             
                 rejected under 35 U.S.C.  102(e) as anticipated by Bolich N646 or Bolich N658.   We                                                   
                 reverse.                                                                                                                               
                          Simply put, the examiner has failed to establish that either Bolich N646 or Bolich                                            
                 N658 describes a composition within the scope of the claims on appeal with the                                                         
                 specificity required by 35 U.S.C.  102.  There is no dispute that each of the Bolich                                                  
                 references describes hair care compositions which comprise the silicone macromer-                                                      
                 containing copolymer required by claim 1(a)(i), the volatile silicone fluid required by                                                
                 claim 1(a)(ii), and water required by claim 1(b).  See generally column 14, line 57-                                                   
                 column 17, line 66 (silicone macromer-containing copolymer); column 9, line 62-column                                                  
                 10 line 31 (volatile silicone fluid) and the examples (water) and, specifically, examples                                              
                 such as Example XII which contain a silicone macromer-containing copolymer, volatile                                                   


                          2The statement of the rejections set forth on page 3 of the Examiner’s Answer                                                 
                 includes claims 9, 10, and 19.  We see this as an inadvertent error on the part of the                                                 
                 examiner in view of the statement at page 1 of the Examiner’s Answer that claims 9, 10,                                                
                 and 19 are only objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.                                                             
                                                                           3                                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007