Appeal No. 2006-0438
Application No. 10/319,905
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to a preparation
for treating keratin fibers comprising a substantive dye for
coloring the fibers and vitamin B6, or a derivative thereof.
According to appellants, “[i]n addition to coloring, the subject
preparation and process provides a restructuring benefit to the
keratin fibers” (sentence bridging pages 2 and 3 of brief).
Appealed claims 1-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Gast in view of Lindenbaum.
Appellants do not set forth separate arguments for any
particular claim on appeal. Accordingly, all the appealed claims
stand or fall together with claim 1.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellants’ arguments
for patentability. However, we are in complete agreement with
the examiner that the claimed subject matter would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of
Section 103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly, we
will sustain the examiner’s rejection for the reasons set forth
in the answer, which we incorporate herein, and we add the
following for emphasis only.
There is no dispute that Gast, like appellants, discloses a
preparation for dying hair comprising a substantive dye, and
teaches that the preparation can also contain conventional
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007