Appeal 2007-0315
Application 10/374,300
DISCUSSION
Obviousness over Jokura
Claims 1-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over
Jokura.
The elements of claim 1 are described by Jokura
Jokura describes a skin cosmetic “having an excellent moisturizing
effect,” without causing skin irritation (Jokura, at col. 1, ll. 59-61). The
cosmetic comprises: (A) a ceramide or pseudoceramide (Jokura, at col. 2, ll.
9-30); (B) a dicarboxylic acid (Jokura, at col. 2, ll. 31-35); and (C) a salt of
the same dicarboxylic acid (Jokura, at col. 2, ll. 38-39; Answer 3).
Malonic acid, which is recited in instant claim 1, is listed by Jokura
among eight examples of dicarboxylic acids (Jokura, at col. 3, ll. 31-36)
(component B) (Answer 3). Five examples of dicarboxylic acid salts
(component (C)) are disclosed, including three examples, alkanolamines,
“basic amino acid (for example, lysine, arginine)”, and ammonium salts
(Jokura, at col. 3, ll. 41-45; Answer 3-4), which meet the limitations in claim
1 of an “ammonia” or “hydrocarbyl amine” salt. Thus, the claimed “amine
neutralized malonic acid” salt is disclosed in the limited genus of
dicarboxylic acid salts taught by Jokura.
According to Jokura, “[t]o achieve a sufficient moisturizing effect
while avoiding excessive irritation, it is preferable that the total content of
. . . components (B) and (C) . . . in the skin cosmetic . . . falls within a range
of from 0.01 to 20% by weight” (Jokura, at col. 3, ll. 51-55; Answer 4).
This range overlaps with the claimed range of “from about 0.0001 to about
30% by weight of a salt” recited in claim 1.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013