Appeal No. 1998-0654
Application No. 08/522,874
on hair, thus providing improved styling performance"
(sentence bridging pages 1 and 2, and lines 2-3,
respectively). Hence, it is apparent that appellants'
invention resides not in incorporating latex polymer particles
in aqueous-based shampoos but, rather, utilizing latex
particles having a lower Tg than customary. Accordingly, the
examiner should explore the specific Tg values for the latex
particles of the acknowledged prior art, and determine whether
the difference between the latex particles within the scope of
the appealed claims and those of the acknowledged prior art
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Also, the examiner should consider commonly-assigned U.S.
Patent No. 6,113,890, for obviousness-type double patenting
issues, as well as for the cited prior art.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
decision rejecting the appealed claims is reversed, and the
application is remanded to the examiner for the reasons set
forth above.
This application, by virtue of its "special" status,
requires immediate action. See the Manual of Patent Examining
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007