Appeal No. 2006-1544 Application 10/024,621 the claim limitation relating to a prediction correlating the use of at least one beauty product with a predicted future occurrence. Accordingly, we sustain the rejection of claims 21 through 23 and 48 through 50 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). To summarize: the examiner’s rejection of claims 1 through 69 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement is not sustained, however, the rejections of claims 1, 4 through 6, 9 through 15, 17 through 20, 24 through 27, 29 through 36, 43 through 47, 51 through 53, 56, 59 through 62 and 64 through 67 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Maloney, of claims 2, 3, 7, 8, 16, 28, 37 through 42, 54, 55, 57, 58, 63, 68 and 69 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on Maloney in view of Shim, and of claims 21 through 23 and 48 through 50 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Maloney in view of Shim, Williams and Nordbye are sustained. Since at least one rejection of each of the claims on appeal has been sustained, it follows that the decision of the examiner is affirmed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under CFR § 1.136(a)(1)(iv). AFFIRMED 14Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007