Appeal No. 2005-0708
Application No. 09/968,967
appellants’ arguments, we determine that the preponderance of
evidence weighs most heavily in favor of obviousness within the
meaning of section 103(a). Accordingly, we affirm the examiner’s
rejection of claim 1, and the claims that stand or fall with
claim 1, under section 103(a) over Medelnick.
B. The Rejection over Medelnick in view of Simon
The examiner adopts the findings from Medelnick as discussed
above and in the Answer (Answer, page 6). The examiner
recognizes that Medelnick fails to disclose a particulate phase
with a pearlescent agent as required by claim 29 on appeal (id.).
Therefore the examiner applies Simon for the teaching of makeup
compositions containing a goniochromatic pigment and additional
coloring agents such as pearlescent agents (id.). From these
findings, the examiner concludes that it would have been obvious
to one of ordinary skill in this art at the time of appellants’
invention to incorporate the pearlescent agents taught by Simon
into the particulate phase of Medelnick to achieve various colors
and products that glitter in the light when applied to the user’s
skin (id.).
Appellants argue that Simon fails to provide any motivation
to combine its teachings with Medelnick since Simon discloses
pearlescent agents as having the drawback of not being intense
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007