Appeal No. 2004-1419
Application 09/733,041
spray that is more opaque, that drifts downwards, and that gives
a more gentle impression than that produced by prior art aerosol
receptacles containing a liquefied propellant gas. Independent
claim 1 is representative of the subject matter on appeal, and a
copy of that claim, as reproduced from the Appendix to
appellant’s brief, is attached to this decision.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the claims before us on appeal are:
Burke et al. (Burke) 4,071,196 Jan. 31, 1978
Heeb et al. (Heeb) 4,322,037 Mar. 30, 1982
Lund 5,711,488 Jan. 27, 1998
Claims 15 and 39 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly
point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which appellant
regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 10 through 12, 23, 33 and 34 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Lund.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007