Ex Parte Graydon et al - Page 2

             Appeal No. 2007-0360                                                           Page 2             
             Application No. 11/050,001                                                                        

             known to impart a fabric-softening benefit to the laundered fabric.  Id. at 1: 20 to              
             2:6.                                                                                              
                   “[P]olydimethylsiloxane is the preferred silicone component for                             
             incorporation into a solid particulate laundry detergent composition to provide a                 
             fabric-softening benefit.”  Id. at 2: 33-34.  “However, the unsubstituted nature of               
             the polydimethylsiloxane also means that it is a highly hydrophobic material.  In                 
             addition, the polydimethylsiloxane is in the form of a fluid at ambient conditions,               
             and cannot simply be dry-added to a solid particulate laundry detergent                           
             composition; a suitable solid carrier material must be used. Clay is the most highly              
             preferred solid carrier material for polydimethylsiloxane.”  Id. at 3: 5-9. “However,             
             due to the very high hydrophobic nature of the polydimethylsiloxane, when the                     
             polydimethylsiloxane is admixed with a clay, the resultant particulate admixture is               
             rendered hydrophobic, which leads to a poor fabric-softening profile.”  Id. at                    
             3: 11-14.  With this as background, Appellants conclude: “The Inventors have                      
             surprisingly found that both polydimethylsiloxane and clay can be admixed                         
             together and incorporated into a solid particulate laundry detergent composition to               
             provide a good fabric softening performance by selectively modifying the amounts                  
             of other specific components that need to be present in the composition.”  Id. at 3:              
             16-20.                                                                                            

                                                DISCUSSION                                                     
                   Claims 1-17 and 19-26, all the pending claims, are on appeal.  Br. 2.  All the              
             claims are rejected over the same prior art reference.  Br. 5.  Appellants have                   
             provided separate arguments for the patentability of the following groups of                      
             claims:  1) claims 1-9, 12-16, and 19-24; 2) claim 10; 3) claim 11; and 4) claims                 
             17, 25, and 26.  We address each grouping separately.                                             




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013