Appeal No. 1998-0370
Application No. 08/568,410
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by Tricca.8 Tricca
discloses aqueous compositions suitable for cleaning fruits and vegetables composed of
ingredients that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration as GRAS.
(Column 1, lines 42-66). Tricca discloses the use of surfactant in amounts which
anticipate claims 1-4 and 6-8. (See examples and column 3, line 57 to column 4, line 25).
Claim 5 is anticipated by Tricca which discloses the use of acid and buffering agents to
maintain a pH of 9. (Column 4, lines 44-46).
CONCLUSION
In summary, we affirm the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1 and 3-10 under
35 U.S.C. § 103. We reject claims 1-8 under 35 U.S.C.§ 102(e) and claim 2 under 35
U.S.C. § 103.
In addition to affirming the Examiner's rejection of one or more claims, this
decision contains a new ground of rejection pursuant to 37 CFR §1.196(b) (amended
effective Dec. 1, 1997, by final rule notice, 62 Fed. Reg. 53131, 53197 (Oct. 10, 1997),
1203 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 63, 122 (Oct. 21, 1997)). 37 CFR § 1.196(b) provides, "A new
ground of rejection shall not be considered final for purposes of judicial review."
Regarding any affirmed rejection, 37 CFR § 1.197(b) provides:
8 We have not determined the suitability of rejecting claims 9 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. 103
over Tricca. If Appellants choose to pursue prosecution before the Examiner, the Examiner is free to
make all appropriate obviousness determinations including additional references in combination with
Tricca.
-11-
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007