Appeal No. 2002-0454
Application No. 09/083,122
a) providing Garcinia fruit;
b) extracting the Garcinia fruit with an alkyl alcohol to obtain an extract;
c) repeating step b) to obtain another extract;
d) combining te extracts of steps b) and c) to obtain a combined extract;
e) treating the combined extract with potassium hydroxide to obtain a treated
extract;
f) refluxing the treated extract to obtain potassium hydroxy citrate precipitate;
g) isolating the precipitate;
h) washing the precipitate with an alkyl alcool to obtain a washed precipitate; and
thereafter
drying the washed precipitate to obtain dried potassium hydroxy citric acid.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:
Lewis 5,776,477 July 1998
Lowenstein, Jay, ed., Methods in Enzymology, Vol. XIII, “Citric Acid Cycle”, Academic
Press, New York, pp. 612-617 (1969)
Grounds of Rejection
Claims 1-2, 5-6 and 16-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) for
obviousness over Lewis in view of Lowenstein.
We reverse this rejection.
DISCUSSION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given consideration to the
appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied references, and to the respective
positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner’s
Answer for the examiner’s reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the appellants’
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007