Appeal No.2003-0078 Page 3
Application No.09/257,066
Appellants have identified claims 1-8 and 12-20 as being
grouped together (brief, page 7). We treat the claims in that
claimed grouping separately only to the extent appellants have
argued the limitations of the claim(s) from that grouping
separately with respect to any of the rejections consistent with
37 CFR § 1.192 (c)(7)(1997). Since appellants have not furnished
such separate arguments, we select claim 1 as the representative
claim for that claim grouping.
OPINION
After careful consideration of the issues raised in this
appeal and with the arguments of both appellants and the
examiner, we find that the § 103 rejections of the appealed
claims are well founded and are sustainable essentially for the
reasons advanced by the examiner in the answer. Accordingly, we
affirm the decision of the examiner, and offer the following in
additional support thereof.
Rejection over Falk ‘967 or Falk ‘286
Like appellants, Falk ‘967 discloses an aqueous film forming
foam (AFFF) composition including a fluorinated surfactant, such
as an amphoteric fluorinated surfactant, a foam forming
surfactant, such as an amphoteric fluorine - free surfactant, an
antifreeze (frost proofing) material, and an electrolyte, such
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007