Appeal No. 1997-0011
Application No. 08/162,508
colognes and sachets, which mask rather than neutralize malodors (see the specification at
page 1, lines 13 through 24). Thus the "patch containing fragrance" defined by appellants'
claims excludes the use of common prior art neutralizing deodorants, as appellants have
implicitly argued in their brief.
As evidence of obviousness of the claimed deodorizer, the examiner relies on the
combined teachings of Greenawalt and Guillet. Greenawalt contains no disclosures relating
to fragrances or deodorizers, which is the subject matter of the herein claimed invention. What
Greenawalt discloses is an arch support (19) as shown in figure 1 which uses Velcro-type
interlocking pads (31) for releasably attaching the arch support to a second Velcro-type
interlocking pad (32) secured to a shoe inner sole.
Guillet teaches a double insole as shown in figures 1 through 7 in which an adsorbent
paper insole (referred to as "b") is interlayered between the layers of the double insole. The
adsorbent paper sole is impregnated with an antiseptic deodorizing product which neutralizes
unpleasant odor released from feet. (see the translation at page 1). As appellants point out
in their brief, Guillet contains no teaching about means directly attached to a fragrance
containing patch and means attached to a fastener providing releasable interlocking surfaces
which engage upon pressing together said interlocking surfaces of a patch and a fastener as
required by the appealed claim deodorizer.
The examiner argues that one of ordinary skill in this art would have been motivated to
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007