Appeal No. 1997-3170
Application No. 08/330,597
also supported by the applied prior art references, namely
Chun and Suzuki, which distinguish rinse aids from dishwashing
detergents.
Having interpreted the claims on appeal as indicated
above, we agree with appellant that none of the applied prior
art references teaches or would have suggested the claimed
food grade rinse aid composition. As argued by appellant
(Brief, page 10), Chun does not teach or suggest adding a
defoamer to its rinse aid composition. There is no evidence
that the rinse aid composition described in Chun needs a
defoamer, much less the claimed defoamer.
As also argued by appellant (Brief, pages 11 and 12),
Corring is not directed to the claimed food grade rinse aid
composition. Rather, it is directed to a cleaning composition
containing components which are precluded by the claims on
appeal. The examiner, however, has not explained why it would
have been obvious to remove those components and the
corresponding functions from the cleaning composition
described in Corring.
As further argued by appellant (Brief, pages 15 and 16),
Suzuki does not teach, nor would have suggested, a rinse aid
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007