Appeal No. 2006-0379
Application No. 10/315,780
Claims 40-45 and 49 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being obvious over Devic.
Claims 50-53 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by, or in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being obvious over Devic.
With regard to the claims under consideration in this
appeal, to the extent that any one claim is specifically and
separately argued regarding patentability, we will consider such
claim. See 37 CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)(September 2004); formerly
37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(2003). Also see Ex parte Schier, 21
USPQ2d 1016, 1018 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1991).
OPINION
I. The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 40-45 and 49
The examiner’s position for this rejection is set forth on
page 2 of the Office Action mailed June 4, 2004 (we note that
the examiner refers to this Office Action as having been mailed
on May 27, 2004, on page 2 of the answer).
The examiner states that Devic discloses peroxide bleached
whole wheat kernels, which are converted into white wheat flour.
The examiner’s position is that finding the optimal fiber
content, and pH, of the wheat flour would require nothing more
than routine experimentation by one reasonably skilled in the
art. Office action of June 4, 2004, page 2.
Beginning on page 5 of the brief, appellant argues that
Devic does not teach to make a white, whole wheat flour,
including whitened bran and endosperm which has not been tainted
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007