Appeal 2007-0042
Application 09/746,880
Accordingly, the issues in this appeal are as follows: (1) does Beerse
teach the use of polysaccharides and polyacrylamides as thickeners in skin
care compositions?; and (2) would it have been within the ordinary skill in
this art to use the thickener of Beerse in the skin care composition of
Krzysik with a reasonable expectation of successful results?
We determine that the Examiner has established a prima facie case of
obviousness in view of the reference evidence, which prima facie case has
not been adequately rebutted by Appellants’ arguments.1 Therefore, we
AFFIRM the sole ground of rejection in this appeal essentially for the
reasons stated in the Answer, as well as those reasons set forth below.
OPINION
We determine the following factual findings from the record in this
appeal:
(1) Krzysik discloses an absorbent article comprising a topsheet,
backsheet, an absorbent core located between the topsheet and
backsheet, and the topsheet has a lotion formulation applied to it,
where the lotion formulation comprises an emollient, a wax, and a
viscosity enhancer (Abstract; col. 2, ll. 10-30; col. 3, ll. 12-23; col.
9, ll. 31-41; and the Answer 3-4);
(2) Krzysik discloses that the lotion composition has a reduced level
of migration, reduces the abrasion to the wearer’s skin, and
1 We have also considered the Decision in related Appeal No. 2005-1186
(S.N. 09/746,872), as well as related Appeal No. 2007-0326 (S.N.
09/746,888), and related U.S. Patent No. 6,287,581 B1 (S.N. 09/379,928;
see the Specification 2:14-21).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013