Appeal No. 2003-0845 Page 2
Application No. 09/689,818
total weight of said cosmetic composition, wherein the glass transition
temperature of said insoluble polymer particles ranges from 15 to 35°C, and
wherein said aqueous dispersion comprises polymer particles instead of
polymers dissolved in a solvent.
34. A pressurized aerosol composition comprising an aqueous dispersion of
insoluble polymer particles, at least one insoluble silicone, and at least one
propellant agent, wherein said insoluble polymer particles are present in a
concentration of at least 10%, relative to the total weight of said pressurized
composition, and the glass transition temperature of said insoluble polymer
particles ranges from 15 to 35°C.
The examiner relies upon the following references:
Yahagi et al. (Yahagi) 4,798,721 Jan. 17, 1989
Dubief et al. (Dubief) 5,160,730 Nov. 03, 1992
Hatfield et al. (Hatfield) 0,590,604 June 04, 1994
(European Patent)
Claims 1-36 and 54-68 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
obvious over the combination Dubeif, Yahagi and Hatfield. After careful review
of the record and consideration of the issue before us, we reverse.
DISCUSSION
The Examiner’s Answer states that claims 1-36 and 54-68 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for the reasons made of record in Paper No. 3. The
rejection as set forth in Paper No. 3, however, does not address the limitation of
the concentration of the insoluble polymer particles in the composition, which is
one of the limitations in contention. We therefore look to the Examiner’s Answer
for the statement of the rejection. As the limitation was addressed by the
Examiner in the Final Rejection, Paper No. 7, and addressed by appellants in the
Appeal Brief, we find that the issue is properly before us on appeal.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007