Appeal No. 2006-1021 Page 5
Application No. 09/851,882
used for dry skin treatment.” Answer, bridging sentence, pages 4-5. In addition,
the examiner asserts (Answer, page 5),
[i]t would have been further obvious to one having ordinary
skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified
the Hoppe invention by adding urea as motivated by Raab because
of an expectation of successfully producing a topical composition
for treating skin disorders including senile xerosis[ ]4, with enhanced
moisturizing property and improved pharmaceutical effects of other
skin care actives.
Claim 1:
In response, appellants assert (Brief, page 6), “Hoppe does not teach or
suggest combining urea with any of the active compounds described therein, and
much less combining urea with coenzyme Q[-]10 specifically in a ratio of
from about 6:1 to about 10:1 (wt./wt.) as required . . .” by claim 1. Similarly,
appellants assert (id.), “Raab fails to teach or suggest adding coenzyme Q[-]10,
and much less combining urea and conenzyme Q[-]10 in a ratio of from about 6:1
to about 10:1 (wt./wt.) as required . . .” by claim 1.
On reflection, we find the weight of the evidence favors the examiner.
Hoppe discloses compositions that comprise coenzyme Q-10. See e.g., Hoppe,
column 7, Example III. According to Hoppe, these compositions are useful for
the treatment of aging skin (column 1, lines 4-8), and more particularly the
treatment of “senile xerosis,” which is characterized by, inter alia dryness,
roughness and itching of the skin (column 1, lines 8-17). According to Hoppe
(column 1, lines 55-58), “coenzyme Q-10 has an important function in the
prevention of skin damage due to UV radiation and the prevention of aging of the
4 As taught by Hoppe. Hoppe, column 1, lines 8-18.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007