Appeal 2007-0907
Application 10/159,367
X- is an anion
iii) an effective amount of at least one polyhydric alcohol having at least
three free hydroxyl groups, and
iv) optionally, water.
The following references are relied upon by the Examiner as evidence
of anticipation and obviousness:
Gosselink EP 0,199,403 A2 Oct. 29, 1986
Johnson US 6,462,014 B1 Oct. 8, 2002
Claims 1-10, 12, 17-19, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Gosselink.
All of the appealed claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Johnson.
Each of these rejections will be sustained for the reasons expressed in
the Answer and below.
The § 102 Rejection
We base our decision to sustain this rejection on the Examiner’s
findings of fact and rebuttals to argument (Answer 3:5-7). We add the
following comments for emphasis.
Many of the Appellants’ arguments for novelty are unpersuasive
because they concern matters to which claim 1 is not limited. For example,
Appellants represent that Gosselink is not anticipatory because it is directed
to a heavy-duty liquid detergent which contains anionic surfactant and soil
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013