Appeal No. 1999-2509
Application 08/752,917
supply with things distributed at intervals.”6 Indeed, the specification also describes the “veins”
as “strands” and further states that the “surface finish . . . may have a marbled appearance”
(specification, e.g., page 5, lines 25-26, and page 7, lines 7-10). There is no limitation on the
number of veins or the dimensions thereof. Indeed, the scope of the claim can be seen from the
disclosure that “it is possible to produce a few large strands . . . within the chocolate matrix or
. . . it is possible to produce a very fine dispersion of veins or strands . . . within the chocolate
matrix to give the appearance of a homogeneous product” (page 5, lines 28-33). The
confectionery composition comprising a syrup can be, inter alia, toffee or caramel (specification,
e.g., page 1, lines 27-34, and page 3, lines 21-24; and claims 17 and 18).
Accordingly, it is the claimed chocolate candy product encompassed by claim 14 in
which at least two or more veins of the confectionery composition, that can be toffee and
caramel, are interspersed in chocolate are produced by the plastic deformation of the particulate
ingredients in admixture as they are coextruded in a non-pourable state through a single die, that
must be compared with the prior art.
We first compare the claimed chocolate candy product of claim 14, as we have
interpreted this claim, with the combined teachings of Pelletier and Cloud as applied by the
examiner. It is the examiner’s position that the “shamrock” of Pelletier Figs. 1 and 2 is made
from two separate “inner” molds that “are shaped stands/veins” made of toffee, thus differing
from the claimed candy product in the absence of chocolate, and in view of the teachings of
Cloud to surround toffee with chocolate, it would have been obvious to use “chocolate in the
outer mold of Pelletier to surround the toffee as taught by Cloud” (answer, page 4; see also pages
8 and 9-10). Indeed, Pelletier identifies the figure to which the examiner refers as a “club
design” made from either a “composite mold form comprising a body portion and a tail portion”
or from a “single piece mold” (col. 4, lines 60-64; see also col. 2, lines 30-34). Appellant
submits that the composite mold for the “club design” in Pelletier does not form two veins that
are interspersed in chocolate as required by appealed claim 14 and therefore, the combination of
Pelletier and Cloud would not result in the claimed chocolate candy product, citing, inter alia,
6 Webster’s II New Riverside University Dictionary, page 628.
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007