The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte MAHMOUD M. ABDEL-MONEM, and
MICHAEL D. ANDERSON
__________
Appeal No. 2006-1226
Application No. 10/272,382
__________
HEARD July 11, 2006
__________
Before ADAMS, GRIMES, and GREEN, Administrative Patent Judges.
GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This appeal involves claims to a 1:1 complex of an essential trace element, such
as zinc or copper, and aspartic acid or glutamic acid. The examiner has rejected the
claims as anticipated by or obvious in view of the prior art. We have jurisdiction under
35 U.S.C. § 134. We agree with the examiner that the claimed complex reasonably
appears to have been known in the art, but we disagree that the cited references would
have suggested combining it with calcium carbonate. We therefore affirm the rejection
for anticipation but reverse the rejection for obviousness.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007