Appeal No. 1997-4101
Application 08/425,802
We answer the latter question in the positive. When it is considered that “shaping”
according to the claims on appeal may be through the simple use of a comb, a brush, or
the fingers, as set forth in claim 31 on appeal, it appears to us that Bolich at the least
suggest the method set forth in claim 30 on appeal. This follows from a consideration of
the normal steps one takes in shampooing ones hair.
We think it is beyond dispute that a person using any shampoo for its ordinary
purpose would apply the shampoo composition to wet or dry hair and, at the least, run
ones fingers through the hair once the shampoo has been applied. We believe it is truly
beyond dispute that persons who have shampooed their hair will allow the hair to dry.
3. Claims 26 and 27
Claim 26 limits the keratin fibers of claim 1 to hair. Claim 27 indicates that the
cosmetic composition of claim 1 is a “hair styling and/or fixing composition.” As to claim
26, Bolich clearly describes applying a cosmetic composition according to claim 1 to hair.
As to claim 27, we find that this requirement does not substantively limit the method of
claim 1 on appeal. Claim 27 does not add any further positive manipulative steps to those
required by claim 1 on appeal.
4. Claims 28 and 29
Claim 28 limits the method of claim 1 to where the keratin fibers being treated are
eyelashes or eyebrows while claim 29 limits the cosmetic composition used in claim 1 to a
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007