Appeal 2006-2632
Application 09/881,807
OPINION
Rejection of Claims 1, 2, 6-31, 40-48, 52-57, 61-86, 95-103, 107-112,
116-141, 150-158, and 162-168 as unpatentable over Narasimhan in
view of Cotteret
The Examiner found that Narasimhan teaches the invention as
claimed with the exception of the cationic homopolymer comprising the
repeating units of the claimed formula (I). (Answer 3). However, the
Examiner notes that Narasimhan generally teaches the use of cationic
homopolymers or copolymers derived from acrylic methacrylic acid wherein
the monomer units are selected from the group consisting of acrylamide,
methylacrylamide, diacetone-acrylamide, acrylamide or methacrylamide
substituted on the nitrogen by lower alkyl, alky ester of acrylic acid and
methacrylic acid. (Answer 4). The Examiner maintains that it would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a cationic
homopolymer having formula (I) in Narasimhan’s composition in view of
Cotteret’s disclosure of a hair dyeing composition comprising a cationic
polymer of polyquaternium 37 (i.e., a species within Narasimhan’s disclosed
genus of cationic homopolymers). According to the Examiner, one of
ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings
of Narasimhan and Cotteret for the following reasons:
[T]he primary reference of Narasimhan et al,suggests the use of
cationic polymers in the dyeing composition as conditioning
agents (see col.14, line 34) and the secondary reference of
Cotteret et al. (US' 908), clearly teaches the polymer of
polyquaternium 37 which is structurally similar to those
claimed, and, thus, a person of an ordinary skill in the art would
be motivated to use the polymer of polyquaternium 37 in the
composition of Narasimhan (US' 989 B1) with a reasonable
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007