Appeal No. 1999-2494
Application No. 08/404,676
Domingues as disclosing packaged dough compositions containing
(LTI) yeast. Id., page 5. The examiner relies on Gysler and
Errass as further evidence that dough compositions containing
(LTI) yeast are conventional. Id., pages 5 and 6. According to
the examiner, "[t]o modify Perry et al and substitute one
conventional yeast containing dough composition for another
conventional yeast containing dough composition is seen to have
been obvious." Id., page 5.
Appellant's principal argument is that the examiner has
failed to establish the requisite suggestion, teaching or
motivation to replace the dough product of Perry with an (LTI)
yeast based dough product as disclosed in the secondary
references. In particular, appellant points out that in Perry,
the dough proofs in the container. Appeal Brief, page 8
(referencing column 11, lines 46-49 of Perry). While appellant
concedes that Domingues disclose an (LTI) yeast based dough, they
note that Domingues teaches proofing the dough composition before
it is sealed in a container. Appeal Brief, page 8 (referencing
page 4, lines 20-22 of Domingues). See Domingues, page 8, second
full paragraph. With respect to Gysler, appellant points out
that Gysler is directed to a process for preparing (LTI) yeast
and that Gysler only prepared dough for testing purposes.
55
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007