Appeal 2007-1528
Application 10/360,991
We have thoroughly reviewed Appellants’ arguments for
patentability. However, we are in complete agreement with the Examiner
that the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art within the meaning of § 103 in view of the applied prior art.
Accordingly, we will sustain the Examiner’s rejections for essentially those
reasons expressed in the Answer, and we add the following primarily for
emphasis.
Appellants do not dispute the factual determinations of the Examiner
with respect to the disclosure of Hayes-Jacobson. As recognized by the
Examiner, Hayes-Jacobson does not disclose a dough comprising cornmeal
and a filling comprising bread crumbs. Appellants do not take issue with the
Examiner’s legal conclusion that it would have been obvious for one of
ordinary skill in the art, based on Bongiovanni, to add cornmeal to the dough
of Hayes-Jacobson. Also, Appellants make no argument that it would have
been nonobvious, based on the disclosures of Lee and Pesheck and the state
of the prior art, to add bread crumbs to the product of Hayes-Jacobson.
Rather, the sole argument advanced by Appellants is that none of the
references provides “any insight or instruction to one of skill in the art that
the inclusion of bread crumbs inside a pre-cooked dough will help to reduce
boil-out of an internal filling during microwave heating of a microwavable
dough product” (Br. 11, penultimate para.).
The Examiner appreciates that neither Lee nor Pescheck teaches that
the inclusion of bread crumbs functions as a boil out reducing agent which
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013