Appeal No. 1997-2198
Application 08/262,953
doubt the truth of the statements in the specification that
the invention is effective for treating alopecia areata or
male pattern baldness, and provide the required supporting
evidence or reasoning. Consequently, we reverse the rejection
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
The examiner argues that Brodbeck discloses at page 2,
column 1, fourth full paragraph that the composition can
contain water (answer, page 4). Page 2, column 1 of Brodbeck,
however, does not have a fourth paragraph. Because all of
appellant’s claims require water and the examiner has not
properly explained where Brodbeck discloses or would have
fairly suggested, to one of ordinary skill in the art,
including water in the disclosed nursery powder composition,
the examiner has not carried his burden of establishing a
prima facie case of obviousness over this reference of the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007