Appeal No. 2005-1827
Application No. 10/227,761
OPINION
REJECTIONS UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 102
Upon careful review of the respective positions advanced by Appellants
and the Examiner, we affirm the rejections as presented by the Examiner.
The Examiner has rejected claims 78-79 and 85 over Angell under Section
102(b). According to the Examiner, Answer pages 3 to 5, each of the stated
references disclose detergent compositions that comprise the specifically
claimed benefit agent. For example, the Examiner asserts Angell discloses a
detergent composition which comprises disinfecting agents (i.e., benefit agent)
sodium nonanoyloxybenzenesulfonates (NOBS). The Examiner concludes that
Angell anticipates the claimed invention.
Appellants argue that Angell fails to teach compositions adapted for
treating shoes. Specifically, Appellants argue that the claim limitation
“formulated so that any damage as a result of washing the one or more shoes
with or in an aqueous medium with application of the treating composition is
reduced compared to washing the one or more shoes with or in an aqueous
medium without application of the treating composition” is not disclosed by the
reference. (Brief, p. 8).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007