Appeal No. 2002-1559 Page 11
Application No. 09/282,708
not argued separately on the merits rise or fall with the independent claim to
which they relate).
Brown is relied upon as above. The rejection acknowledges that Brown
does not teach the use of metal salts of pyridinethione as required by claims 4
and 9, and does not teach the pearlescent agent required by claim 5. See
Examiner’s Answer, page 5.
Vermeer is relied upon for teaching hair care compositions, such as
shampoos and conditioners, which are in the form of thick liquids, e.g.. gels, and
for teaching that such compositions may contain pearlescent agents such as
ethylene glycol stearates and titanium dioxide coated mica, and may also contain
zinc pyridinethione and other agents. See id.
The Examiner’s Answer concludes:
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having
ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was made
to use zinc pyridinethione and/or pearlescent agents of Vermeer for
compositions of Brown [ ] for their art-recognized purpose.
Id.
Appellants argue that Vermeer merely adds that “one can use zinc
pyridinethione and other hair care ingredients in its compositions,” and that “[a]ny
number of publications might have supplied this information.” Appeal Brief, page
14. Appellants conclude that “[s]ince Brown fails to disclose the claimed
treatment compositions, and makes only passing reference to hair gels, one
skilled in the art would not combine the teachings of Brown and Vermeer, to
arrive at the claimed compositions of claims 4, 5 and 9.” Id. at 14-15.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007