Appeal No. 2005-0112 Page 6
Application No. 09/737,004
formation of protein deposits on contact lenses means that Heiler teaches away from the
compositions of the present invention (Brief, pp. 9-10). The Examiner has found that the
claimed composition is suggested by Heiler and Appellant has not pointed to any evidence to the
contrary.
In the Reply Brief, Appellant sets forth a chart in Table 2 purporting to compare the
composition of Heiler to that of claim 1. This chart, however, does not address the findings of
the Examiner. Heiler, as found by the Examiner, describes a composition containing not only
polyquaternium polymers, but various surfactants and viscosity builders that meet the
requirements of the claims (Answer, p. 4). Appellant has not convinced us of any reversible
error on the part of the Examiner.
As a final point, we note that Appellant bases no arguments upon objective evidence of
non-obviousness such as unexpected results. We conclude that the Examiner has established a
prima facie case of obviousness with respect to the subject matter of claims 1-12 which has not
been sufficiently rebutted by Appellant.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1-12 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) is affirmed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007