Appeal 2006-2115
Application 09/862,077
size; drying the cut extrudate; and coating the dried extrudate with a duck-
based digest (Lowe, e.g., Abstract, 3:25-5:6, 5:17-26, and Example 1).
Lowe discloses that the dog food product increases the rate of passage of
food through the intestine, thereby reducing caloric intake and thus, weight
of the dog, and that the CLA “further increases this caloric restriction”
(Lowe 3:25-4:6). Lowe further discloses that the dog food product should
include nutritional ingredients “for proper maintenance of the dog” (Lowe
4:18-27). Lowe still further discloses that the dog food product must be
palatable, and “a preferred way of achieving high palatability is to apply a
duck-based digest as an outer coating to the product” (Lowe 3:1-9 and
4:15-17).
We find that Franzen would have disclosed that the palatability of a
nutritionally complete dog food for dogs is increased by the use of one or
more of eight specific L-amino acid as palatants which can be combined
with other ingredients to form a coating composition that is applied to the
surface of extruder-kibbled, that is, pelleted,3 nutritional dog food (Franzen,
e.g., col. 2, l. 52, to col. 4, l. 10). In Franzen Example I, a coating
comprising an L-amino acid and “6% of bleachable fancy tallow” is coated
on extruder-kibbled dog food (Franzen col. 4, ll. 55-66).
The difference between the CLA containing dog food products and
methods of making the same encompassed by claims 1, 8, 14, and 19 and as
disclosed by Lowe is the absence of a tallow containing coating for Lowe’s
dog food. The difference between these claimed inventions and the dog
3 See, e.g., kibble, The American Heritage Dictionary Of The English
Language 962 (4th ed., Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company. 2000).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007