Appeal No. 2005-0263
Application No. 10/314,766
For example, the subject specification discloses that the
appellant’s soap bar element is economical by reducing residual
soap waste and by using an inexpensive non-soap core (e.g., see
lines 5-11 on page 1, lines 3-9 on page 3 and lines 1-8 on page
6). Corresponding objectives are disclosed in the applied
references. By way of exemplification, the Abstract and lines
16-23 in column 1 of Hadley disclose reducing soap waste, and the
use of inexpensive core materials is disclosed by Allen (see
lines 4-9 in column 2) as well as by Di Giovanna (see lines 2-10
in column 2). The fact that the applied references disclose
objectives corresponding to those disclosed by the appellant
supports the examiner’s conclusion that the respective reference
disclosures would have suggested soap bar elements having core
sizes within the appellant’s claimed range.
Finally, the appellant argues that his nonobviousness
position is supported by additional considerations such as a long
felt but unsatisfied need (e.g., see pages 10-12 of the brief).
However, the record before us contains no probative evidence of
such additional considerations as a long felt but unsatisfied
need vis-à-vis reducing wastage of soap bars used in hotels. On
the other hand, the soap bar of Allen is explicitly disclosed as
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007