Appeal No. 2005-1655 Page 3
Application No. 09/852,624
OPINION
As Appellants argue the claims as a group, we select a single claim to decide the appeal
in accordance with 37 CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)(2004). We select claim 30. Claim 30 is directed
to a composition for the oxidation dying of keratin fibers. The composition must contain, at
least, (a) an enzyme from 2-electron oxidoreductases, (b) a donor, (c) an anionic surfactant, and
(d) an oxidation base.
The Examiner finds, and Appellants do not dispute, that Tomura describes a composition
having the required enzyme, donor, and oxidation base in accordance with components (a), (b),
and (d) of claim 30. The question is whether it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
in the art of hair dying to incorporate one of the listed anionic surfactants of component (c) into
the composition of Tomura. Because Tomura specifically suggests the inclusion of anionic
surfactants and Lim indicates that at least some of the anionic surfactants of component (c) of
claim 30, namely, acylsarcosinates and acylisethionates, were known for use in hair dying
compositions, we agree with the Examiner that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art to select one of those known surfactants as the anionic surfactant of Tomura to
provide the properties expected from an anionic surfactant in the hair dying composition of
Tomura.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007