Appeal No. 1996-3995
Application 08/283,721
type emulsion, especially when the nonpreferred W/O type
emulsion specifically set forth by JP ‘677 teaches amounts of
each component far outside the amounts recited in the claims
on appeal. Alternatively, the examiner has not pointed to any
evidence or reasoning as to why one of ordinary skill in the
art would have modified the nonpreferred O/W type emulsion
embodiment specifically taught by JP ‘677.
For the foregoing reasons, we determine that the examiner
has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness.
Therefore we need not reach the issue of the sufficiency of
appellants’ showing of unexpected results (the Masuda
Declarations under 37 CFR § 1.132 dated Mar. 24, 1994, and
June 9, 1994). In re Geiger, 815 F.2d 686, 688, 2 USPQ2d
1276, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 1987). Accordingly, the examiner’s
rejection of the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over JP
‘677 is reversed.
C. Summary
The rejection of the claims on appeal under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) over JP ‘677 is reversed. The rejection of the
claims on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over JP ‘677 is
reversed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007