Appeal No. 95-2823
Application No. 08/078,383
iodine value are interrelated according to the specific terms
of claim 1. Appellants are able to achieve a shortening
having the claimed properties because of their starting oil
IMC 01. See the Appeal Brief, paragraph bridging pages 5 and
6 and see the instant specification, page 3, last paragraph.
The references relied on by the examiner contain copious
disclosure relating to partially hydrogenated canola oils.
The examiner, however, has not established that those
references would have led a person having ordinary skill in
the art to the shortening products defined in independent
claim 1. The rejection of claims 1 through 7 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as unpatentable over Unichema "in view of" Bansal is
reversed.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth in the body of this opinion, we
do not sustain the rejection of claims 1 through 7 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Unichema alone, or
Unichema "in view of" Bansal. Accordingly, the examiner's
decision rejecting those claims is reversed. The appeal with
respect to claim 10 is dismissed.
REVERSED
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007