Appeal No. 2005-0467
Application No. 10/217,278
The examiner relies upon the following reference as evidence
of obviousness:
Anderson et al. (EP' 211) 936,211 A2 Aug. 18, 1999
(European Patent Application)
Appellants' claimed invention is directed to a photo-labile
pro-fragrance having the recited formula. According to
appellants, "[t]he present invention is directed to the
surprising discovery that R1 units, which are electron-donating
groups, modulate the rate at which the photo-labile fragrance raw
material is released" (page 2 of Brief, paragraph three).
Appealed claims 1-8, 10-20 and 22-30 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over EP '211.
Appellants submit at page 2 of the Brief that "[c]laims 1-8,
10-20 and 22-30 stand or fall together." Accordingly, all the
appealed claims stand or fall together with claim 1, and we will
limit our consideration to the examiner's rejection of claim 1.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellants' arguments
for patentability. However, we are in complete agreement with
the examiner that the claimed subject matter would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of
§ 103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly, we will
adopt the examiner's reasoning as our own in sustaining the
rejection of record, and we add the following for emphasis only.
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007