Ex Parte WAKABAYASHI et al - Page 2




             Appeal No. 2003-1018                                                                                
             Application No. 09/093,771                                                                          

                   Claims 1 is illustrative of the claims on appeal and reads as follows:                        
                   1.   A method of separating and isolating a lipid-rich lipid/protein complex from             
             soybeans, comprising:                                                                               
                   adding a substance having the ability to aggregate lipids with proteins selected              
             from the group consisting of sodium chloride, potassium chloride and ammonium                       
             chloride in amounts from 0.05 to 0.5 M, to a water extract of soybeans, thereby                     
             producing a sedimenting or floating lipid-rich lipid/protein complex,                               
                   wherein the lipid content of the complex is at least 45% per aggregate;                       
                   isolating the sedimenting or floating lipid-rich lipid/protein complex; and wherein           
             the weight ratio of lipid to protein of the isolated complex is at least 2-fold higher than         
             the weight ratio of lipid to protein of the soybeans.                                               

                   The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:                                     
             Chayen                    2,928,821                  Mar. 15, 1960                                  
             Puski                     4,697,004                  Sept. 29, 1987                                 
             Yoshimura                 5,670,624                  Sept. 23, 1997                                 

             Grounds of Rejection                                                                                
                   Claims 1, 5-11, 14-16, 21 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as                     
             obvious over Chayen in view of Puski and Yoshimura.                                                 


                                                 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.                                           


                                                       2                                                         





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007