Appeal 2007-1396
Application 10/375,235
20. An aqueous bleaching medium comprising:
(a) an aqueous medium;
(b) an organic ligand which forms a complex with a transition metal
capable of bleaching a substrate via atmospheric oxygen, the aqueous
bleaching medium being substantially devoid of peroxygen bleach or a
peroxy-based or peroxyl-generating bleach system;
(c) an oxidizable precursor selected from the group consisting of:
(i) a linoleic acid or metal thereof; and
(ii) a generating system for producing a linoleic acid or salt
thereof in situ in the aqueous medium;
(d) an enzyme for oxidizing the oxidizable precursor to form a
hydroperoxide in situ; and
(E) an oily stain containing substrate.
The Examiner relies on the evidence in these references:
Baeck WO 95/26393 A1 Oct. 5, 1995
Hermant WO 97/48787 A1 Dec. 24, 1997
Perkins WO 00/60045 A1 Oct. 12, 2000
“Lipoxygenases,” PROMISE mirror: http://metallo.scripps.edu/PROMISE/
(Nov. 11, 1998) (Promise Mirror).
Appellants request review of the following grounds of rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) advanced on appeal (Br. 8):
claims 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11 through 18, and 20 as unpatentable over Baeck in
view of Hermant and Promise Mirror (Answer 3; Office Action 41); and
claims 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11 through 18, and 20 as unpatentable over Perkins in
view of Baeck (Answer 3; Office Action 6).
The Examiner also advanced on appeal this ground of rejection, and
observes Appellants have not requested review of this ground or presented
argument with respect thereto (Answer 3):
1 The Answer does not set forth the grounds of rejection (Answer 3). We
find the grounds stated in the Office Action.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013