Ex Parte BROWN et al - Page 8


                Appeal No.  2002-1559                                                 Page 8                  
                Application No.  09/282,708                                                                   

                      Brown is relied upon as set forth above, and also for teaching the use of               
                emulsifiers and cationic polymers.  See Examiner’s Answer, page 4.                            
                      According to the Examiner’s Answer:                                                     
                             Brown [ ] do[es] not specifically teach shampoo                                  
                      compositions as claimed in Claim 6.  However, the overall                               
                      disclosure in Brown [ ] would have suggested to the artisan of                          
                      ordinary skill that their compositions could be modified, depending                     
                      on the desired properties of the final product.  For example, Brown                     
                      [ ] teach[es] that “in addition to the above ingredients conventionally                 
                      used in products for personal care, the compositions according to                       
                      the invention can optionally comprise ingredients such as                               
                      colourant, preservative, antioxidant, in amounts which are                              
                      conventional in the cosmetics, pharmaceutical etc.”  See p.5, line                      
                      [sic] 52-54.  In addition, Brown [ ] exemplif[ies] a cleanser gel.  See                 
                      p.10, Example 12.                                                                       
                             Therefore, the reference clearly gives one a reasonable                          
                      expectation of success for modifying the reference’s composition in                     
                      order to make a shampoo composition of the instant invention.                           
                             With respect to claim 7 of the instant invention, Brown [ ]                      
                      do[es] not teach fatty alcohol.  However, Brown [ ] teach[es] fatty                     
                      ester (e.g. isopropyl myristate) and oils used for the same art-                        
                      recognized purpose as fatty alcohols.  Therefore, it would have                         
                      been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of the                         
                      invention to employ fatty alcohols with the reasonable expectation                      
                      of deriving the same cosmetic effect as set forth in the references.                    
                Id. at 4-5.                                                                                   
                      Appellants argue that claim 6, which is drawn to shampoos having specific               
                ranges of surfactant and cationic deposition agent is not suggested by Brown.                 
                With respect to claim 7, appellants argue that while Brown suggests adding fatty              
                esters, the reference does not teach or suggest the addition of a fatty alcohol.              
                      The burden is on the examiner to make a prima facie case of                             
                obviousness, and the examiner may meet this burden by demonstrating that the                  








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007