Appeal No. 2005-0095
Application No. 10/127,776
ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that when using a low
amount of UV absorber the amount of alcohol required to solubilize the
component could have been reduced. Thus, we agree with the Examiner,
Answer pages 7 and 8, that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have
been capable of determining the optimum amount of alcohol for the
composition.
The Examiner rejected claims 1 to 5, 8 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as
obvious over Niedbala and Znaiden. (Answer, p. 6). We select claim 1 as
representative of the rejected claims.
The Appellants argue that “Znaiden does not remedy the basic
deficiencies of Niedbala.” (Brief, p. 10). Appellants also argue that
Zaniaden uses twice as much sunscreen phase as the present invention.
(Brief, p. 10).
We affirm the Examiner’s rejection for the reasons present above.
The Examiner cited the Znaiden reference for disclosing particular
carboxylic acids. These carboxylic acid compounds are not specified in
claim 1. Thus, in affirming the Examiner’s rejection, we do not need to
discuss the Znaiden reference.
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007