Appeal No. 2006-1530 Παγε 9
Application No. 10/221,959
As for the claim 19 requirement for a foamed hair dye,
Pitfield clearly discloses the use of foam stabilizers as an
optional hair dye composition ingredient, which inferentially
indicates that Pitfield discloses or suggests a hair dye
composition that foams, as correctly noted by the examiner
(sentence bridging pages 3 and 4 of the answer). Consequently,
we do not agree with appellants’ contention that Pitfield is
silent about a foamed hair dye composition.
Regarding the methods of claim 20 and 21, which claims
recite the use of the hair dye compositions of claims 11 and 15,
respectively, in dyeing hair, appellants maintain that Pitfield
does not teach the hair dye compositions of claims 11 or claim
15. However, for reasons set forth above and in the answer, we
disagree with those contentions of appellants.
As a final point, we note that appellants do not argue that
the use of their claimed composition is attended by unexpected
results, much less demonstrate such based on evidence referred to
in the brief.
It follows that, on this record, we will sustain the
examiner’s obviousness rejection of all of the appealed claims.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007