Appeal No. 2001-0796 3
Application No. 08/911,199
wherein R16 is C1-C24 alkyl, and
R17 has one of the definitions given for R10; and
B) an organic salt of zinc or magnesium; and
C) either
(C1) an UV absorber or
(C2) a pigment or
(C3) an UV absorber and a pigment.
THE REFERENCES OF RECORD
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon the following references:
Lai et al. (Lai) 4,190,571 Feb. 26, 1980
Kelkenberg et al. (Kelkenberg) 4,356,307 Oct. 26,1982
Gugumus 4,929,652 May 29, 1990
THE REJECTION
Claims 1, 3 through 7 and 9 through 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over the combined teachings of Gugumus, Kelkenberg, and Lai.
OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced by the appellant and the
examiner, and agree with the appellant that the rejection of the claims is not well founded.
Accordingly, we reverse.
The Rejections under Section 103
“[T]he examiner bears the initial burden, on review of the prior art or on any other
ground, of presenting a prima facie case of unpatentability.” See In re Oetiker, 977
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007