Appeal No. 2006-0070 Παγε 4
Application No. 10/024,631
§ 102(b) rejection and remand the application to the examiner for
appropriate action.
In order for a claimed invention to be anticipated under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b), the applied prior art reference must clearly
and unequivocally disclose all of the elements of the claims on
appeal, “without any need for picking, choosing, and combining
various disclosures” therein. In re Arkley, 455 F.2d 586, 587-
88, 172 USPQ 524, 526 (CCPA 1972).
Here, the prior art reference, Hill, relied upon by the
examiner teaches a chewing gum comprising a gum base containing a
flavoring agent and a sweetening/bulking agent coated with an
emulsion coating containing one or more therapeutic substances.
See column 15, lines 12-19 and column 18, line 10 to column 19,
line 31. Hill then goes on to state (column 16, lines 6-13)
that:
Other substances which may also be included in the
chewing gum base mixture and which may also be added to
the emulsion coating include: non toxic sources for
acid such as adipic acid in combination with calcined
kaolin1, calcium carbonate, sodium carbonate, sodium
bicarbonate, various phosphates, dicalcium phosphate,
tetra sodium pyrophosphate, lecithin, lanolin,
hydrolyzable tannin, silica, and the like. (Emphasis
added.)
1
1 The terms “kaolin”, “hydrolyzable tannin” and “various
phosphates” include many clays, tannin compounds and phosphates.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007