Appeal No. 2006-0438
Application No. 10/319,905
55). As a result, we have no doubt that one of ordinary skill in
the art would have found it obvious to include vitamins, in
general, and vitamin B6, in particular, in the preparation of
Gast.
Appellants also maintain that “Lindenbaum is silent
regarding the issue of colorants to the disclosed formulation,”
and “does not suggest that either dyes or conditioning agents may
be used in formulations that are intended to enhance hair growth
and restore hair to its natural color by stimulating dormant hair
follicles” (page 4 of brief, first full paragraph, and paragraph
bridging pages 4 and 5 of the brief, respectively). However,
Gast provides the teaching of incorporating vitamin conditioning
agents in the formulation comprising substantive dyes, and
appellants have advanced no reason why one of ordinary skill in
the art would have been dissuaded from selecting vitamin B6 for
the vitamin conditioning agent taught by Gast.
We note that appellants base no argument upon objective
evidence of non-obviousness, such as unexpected results, which
would serve to rebut the inference of obviousness established by
the applied prior art.
Regarding allowed claims 10-12, the examiner, in an action
dated November 5, 2003 states at page 4: “[T]he prior art of
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007