Appeal No. 1997-0699 Page 4
Application No. 08/217,659
OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments
advanced by appellants and the examiner and agree with
appellants that the aforementioned rejection is not well
founded. Accordingly, we shall not sustain the examiner's
rejection.
In applying Clausen and Wurster to appellants' claims,
the examiner takes the position that it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the
granulating composition and process of making the composition
of Clausen by employing polyethylene glycol as a binder
therein so as to arrive at the claimed invention. From our
perspective, the examiner's explanation falls significantly
short of establishing that one of ordinary skill in the art
would have been led to modify the Clausen granulating process
for forming a solid portion of a hair bleaching preparation by
using polyethylene glycol granulating material therein as a
binder based on the disclosure of that material in Wurster as
a diluent or disintegration agent useful in granulating
medicament-containing seed particles for subsequent tablet
formation.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007