Appeal No. 1996-0249 Page 5
Application No. 08/076,709
of claims 1-11, 20, and 21 and claim 12 as the representative
claim from the grouping of claims 12, 13, 22, and 23 in
considering the present appeal.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed each of appellant's arguments
for patentability. However, we concur with the examiner that
the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. §
103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly, we will
sustain the examiner's rejection.
We begin with a review of the applied prior art in
relation to representative claim 1. Johnson discloses an
encapsulated food additive including: (1) a core comprising a
condiment (the food additive) that may be blended with a
lipoidal material such as an edible fat that is normally solid
at 95°F (column 2, line
49 through column 3, line 53, and the Example); and (2) a
coating (outer shell) that comprises a material such as an
edible resin, gum, wax, proteinaceous material, and/or
sacchariferous material (column 3, line 54 through column 4,
line 32). Johnson (column 6, lines 15-35) also teaches that:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007