Appeal No. 1995-4903
Application No. 07/926,016
We now turn to the rejection over De Vries. We find that
de Vries discloses an oral care composition in the form of a
dentifrice. See column 1, lines 7-16. We find that the
composition may contain antinucleating agent which provides
anticalculus or antiplaque effect as required by component (a)
of the claimed subject matter. See de Vries column 3, lines
44-47. The specific compound azacycloalkane-2,2-diphosphonic
acid required by the claimed subject matter is disclosed in
column 4, lines 6-7, and 11-14. Additional azacycloalkane-
2,2-diphosphonic acid compounds within the scope of the
claimed subject matter are also incorporated by reference to
U. S. Patent No. 3,988,443 (Ploger) at column 3, line 55.
Component (b) required by the claimed subject matter is
disclosed at column 8, line 7. As noted supra, we find that
1,6-di-p-chlorophenylbiguanidohexane is appellants’ claimed
chlorhexidine. Our finding is again supported by appellants’
specification at column 3, lines 2-3.
The dispositive issue under § 103 for each of
Hayes(‘504)and de Vries is whether a person having ordinary
skill in the art would have found a suggestion in each of the
teachings of Hayes(‘504) and de Vries to prepare an oral care
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007