Appeal 2007-2598
Application 10/378,330
disclosed by King (Answer 5). As shown by factual finding (2) listed above,
we determine that the humectant properties taught by Igoe for potassium
lactate would also have been sufficient reason to add this compound to the
antimicrobial composition for use with meats as disclosed by King.
Contrary to Appellants’ arguments (Br. 11-13; Reply Br. 2-4), the
amounts of each ingredient in the antimicrobial compositions of the claims
on appeal are disclosed or suggested by the prior art. As shown by factual
finding (6) listed above, we determine that Igoe suggests typical amounts of
the potassium compound additive that overlap with the claimed range (at the
endpoint value of 0.1%; see, e.g., claim 2). We also agree with the
Examiner that amounts of potassium lactate would have been routinely
optimized by one of ordinary skill in the food art, for its use as a flavor
enhancer, humectant, or pH control (Answer 10). With regard to the amount
of hop beta acids required by the claims on appeal, we determine that King
suggests use of amounts within the scope of the claims, and Appellants
admit that the use of such amounts was known in the art (see factual findings
(3) and (5) listed above). We further note that Appellants have not argued or
shown any unexpected results achieved by the claimed ranges over the prior
art. See In re Peterson, supra; In re Woodruff, supra.
For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the Answer, we affirm
the rejection of claims 1-32 under § 103(a) over King in view of Igoe. The
decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013