Ex Parte Antheunisse et al - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2004-0290                                                        
          Application No. 09/742,692                                                  


          the reagent having the high binding affinity is lower than the pH           
          of an aqueous wash solution comprising 1 g/l of the composition.            
               In the rejection of the appealed claims, the examiner relies           
          upon the following reference:                                               
          Beggs et al. (Beggs)          WO 98/56885          Dec. 17, 1998            
               Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to an enzymatic              
          bleaching detergent composition comprising an enzyme having a               
          part that is capable of generating a bleaching chemical, such as            
          hydrogen peroxide, and such part is coupled to a reagent having a           
          high binding affinity for stains present on fabrics.  Also, the             
          pI (isoelectric pH) of the reagent is lower than the pH of an               
          aqueous solution comprising 1 g/l of the detergent composition.             
          According to appellants, “[t]he detergent compositions of the               
          invention are particularly attractive to treating ‘problem                  
          stains’ which occur only occasionally, such as tea, red-wine, and           
          blackberry juice” (page 7 of principal brief, second paragraph).            
               Appealed claims 1-24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)           
          as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C.                   
          § 103 as being unpatentable over Beggs.                                     
               Appellants submit at page 10 of the principal brief that               
          “[a]ll claims stand or fall together.”  Accordingly, all the                
          appealed claims stand or fall together with claim 1, and we will            

                                         -2–                                          





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007