Appeal No. 2005-0545
Application No. 09/989,019
Soudant et al. (Soudant), U.S. 5,436,230, patented July 25, 1995;
Koulbanis et al. (Koulbanis), U.S. 4,288,433, patented September 8,
1981; Majeed et al. (Majeed), U.S. %,804,596, patented September 8,
1998; Sekiya, U.S. 5,776,906, patented July 7, 1998; De Simone et
al. (De Simone), WO 98/01128, published January 15, 1998; Japanese
Unexamined Patent Publication Hei 7-61927 (Lotte), published
March 7, 1995;2 Kuppusamy et al. (Kuppusamy), “Effects of Flavonoids
on Cyclic AMP Phosphodiesterase and Lipid Mobilization in Rat
Adipocytes,” Biochemical Pharmacology, Vol. 44, No. 7, pp. 1307-1315
(1992); and Gennaro et al. (Gennaro), Remington’s Pharmaceutical
Sciences, 18th Ed., pp. 1305-1307 (1990). The status of Claim 8 is
not entirely clear. In the Examiner’s Answer, p. 2 (EA2), the
examiner stated, “Upon reconsideration, claim 8, which [is] drawn to
the method of treating cellulite, is allowed.” Appellant’s
arguments were found “persuasive” (EA3). The examiner explained
(EA3; emphasis added):
Claim 8 directed to a method of treating cellulite
is found allowable. Cited prior art, save Koulbanis and
Soudant et al., are silent on treating cellulites. These
anticellulites recitation [sic] are not regards [sic] to
obviate the [sic] claims 1-7 and 9-11. Rebuttal arguments
ar [sic, at] Brief, pages 8-12[,] are persuasive to support
2
For purposes of this appeal, we refer to the English
translation of Japanese Patent Document No. 07-061927 of record
(PTO 03-2568 HAMT, pp. 1-14).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007