Ex Parte Graydon et al - Page 5

             Appeal No. 2007-0360                                                           Page 5             
             Application No. 11/050,001                                                                        

             siloxane is in a pre-emulsified form”, the Examiner states that “[u]se of an                      
             emulsified silicone polymer is exemplified, although this silicone polymer is not                 
             specifically disclosed as being a polydimethylsiloxane. . . . [W]here the use of                  
             emulsified silicones is disclosed [at 33, l. 5] and the suitab[i]lity of polydimethyl-            
             siloxanes is disclosed, the use of an emulsified polydimethylsiloxane would be                    
             obvious in the absence of any evidence of unexpected results.”  Answer 4.  The                    
             Examiner also asserts that the requirement in claim 1 that the PDMS is “pre-                      
             emulsified” is a product-by-process limitation and that there is no pre-emulsified                
             silicone present in the final claimed product.  Id. at 5.                                         
                   With respect to the overlapping amounts, the Examiner concludes that “[i]n                  
             the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the                   
             prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257,                
             191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934                            
             (Fed Cir. 1990).”  Answer 4-5.  With the exception of claim 11 (see infra p. 9),                  
             Appellants do not challenge this conclusion.                                                      
                   Appellants assert that Brockett “fail[s] to disclose a solid particulate laundry            
             detergent composition wherein the polydimethylsiloxane is in a pre-emulsified                     
             form.”  Br. 7, ll. 3-5.  They argue that the skilled worker would recognize that                  
             emulsified PDMS is                                                                                
                   distinguishable from a nonemulsified form and further, the                                  
                   specification discloses that the pre-emulsified form of polydimethyl-                       
                   siloxane improves the processability of the particulate admixture of                        
                   polydimethylsiloxane and clay. . . . In addition, the claim limitation of                   
                   claim 1 is not limited to the process of making the final product (i.e.,                    
                   detergent composition), but rather, claim 1 recites a detergent                             
                   composition comprising a component not taught by Brockett et al                             
                   (i.e., polydimethylsiloxane in its pre-emulsified form).                                    






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

Last modified: September 9, 2013