Appeal No. 1997-0138
Application No. 08/383,912
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies on the
following prior art:
Evans et al. (Evans) 5,358,752 Oct. 25,
1994
(Filed Feb. 23, 1993)
Gaillard-Kelly et al. (Kelly) 5,411,981 May
2, 1995
(Filed May 18, 1993)
Claims 4 through 6 and 8 through 11 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the combined disclosures
of Kelly and Evans.
We reverse.
The claimed subject matter is directed to a cosmetic or
pharmaceutical composition comprising at least one liposome
containing a particular dermatologically active compound. The
cosmetic or pharmaceutical composition is free of any (not
even a trace amount of) volatile solvents since the liposomes
employed are prepared without using any such volatile
solvents. See specification, pages 11-13.
We find that the examiner has supplied a reasonable basis
for employing the liposomes described in Evans as a delivery
system for the active dermatological compounds described in
Kelly. See Answer, page 3. However, the examiner has
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007