Ex Parte Faryniarz et al - Page 12

                Appeal No. 2006-3254                                                                         
                Application No. 10/347,982                                                                   

                include any organic acid known to be useful in skin care compositions.”                      
                (¶20.)  We conclude that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been                    
                motivated to use the alkanolamines described in Cole as the cation of the                    
                dicarboxylic acid salt described in Jokura.                                                  
                      Appellants traverse this rejection for substantially the same reasons                  
                that they traverse the rejection over Jokura in view of Günter.  We are                      
                unpersuaded by these arguments for the reasons discussed above.                              
                      Appellants also argue that Jokura “mentions malonic as one of a series                 
                of dicarboxylic acids.  It has not been singled out.”  (Br. 13.)  In addition,               
                Appellants argue that “[m]alonic acid is not disclosed in Cole et al.  This                  
                reference focuses upon forming salts with alpha-hydroxycarboxylic acids.”                    
                (Br. 12.)                                                                                    
                      We are not persuaded by these arguments.  Although Jokura does not                     
                exemplify a composition in which the dicarboxylic acid salt is a malonic                     
                acid salt, Jokura lists malonic acid among a list of only eight dicarboxylic                 
                acids.  (Col. 3, ll. 31-37.)  Thus, we conclude that the Examiner has set forth              
                a prima facie case that a composition containing a malonic acid salt would                   
                have been obvious based on the teachings of Jokura.                                          
                      We conclude that the Examiner has set forth a prima facie case that                    
                claim 1 would have been obvious over Jokura in view of Cole, which                           
                Appellants have not rebutted.  We therefore affirm the rejection of claim 1                  
                under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  Claims 2, 4-8, 10, and 11 fall with claim 1.                         






                                                     12                                                      

Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013