Appeal No. 1996-3550
Application 08/218,165
Rejection VII
Claims 1 through 37 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Pascal, Sekiya II, Olías, Gardner, Hatanaka, Sekiya I, Dictionary of Gardening and Sigma.
The rejection is set forth on pages 8 through 11 of the Examiner’s Answer.
Inasmuch as we have determined that the subject matter of claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 8 and
11 through 13 is anticipated by one or more of Sekiya I, Hatanaka and Olías, we find the
subject matter of these claims to be prima facie obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as well
(“lack of novelty is the epitome of obviousness” In re May, 574 F.2d 1082, 1089, 197
USPQ 601, 607 (CCPA 1978)).
Moreover, we find no error in the examiner’s determination that it would have been
obvious, based on the disclosures of Hatanaka and Sekiya II, for one of ordinary skill in the
art to have included watermelon, kale, mustard, pigweed or turnip foliage as part of the
plant biomass used to produce green note compounds.
Accordingly, we affirm Rejection VII under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as it pertains to claims
1, 3 through 5, 7 through 9, 11 through 15 and 17.
Claims 2, 6, 10, 16 and 18 through 37, however, are another matter. These claims
include limitations that the examiner has not begun to address in the statement of the
rejection. Merely by way of example, claim 2 requires “simultaneously contacting” yeast
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007