Appeal No. 1998-2941 Page 28
Application No. 08/061,985
Reexamination Control No. 90/003,682
The examiner determined (answer, p. 10) that
[t]he claims differ in that said egg product has a
reduced cholesterol content. However, the art is replete
with methods for reducing the cholesterol in egg products
as taught, for example, by Fioriti et al (e.g. examples).
In addition, Bracco et al teaches cholesterol removal
from an egg material prior to pasteurization of same
(e.g. col. 3, lines 1-46). Therefore, absent a showing
of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one
having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
invention to have employed an egg with reduced
cholesterol content in the processes of any one of Dunn
et al, the PSA reference, or The News and Observer to
provide a healthier egg product with an extended shelf
life.
The appellants argue (brief, p. 168) that Fioriti and
Bracco do not relate to providing an extended shelf life to a
liquid egg product and therefore these references do not cure
the deficiencies of the previously applied prior art. Since
as noted above, there are no deficiencies in the previously
applied prior art, we find this argument unpersuasive.
The appellants assert (brief, p. 169) that the evidence
of nonobviousness (brief, pp. 117-144) would be sufficient to
outweigh the evidence of obviousness with regard to claims 21
and 29.
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007