Ex Parte Ndou et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 19, 2014

12271303 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 19, 2014)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________________

Ex parte THILIVHALI TSHIKOVHI NDOU and
NEVILLE SONNENBERG
____________________

Appeal 2012-001787
Application 12/271,303
Technology Center 3700
____________________

Before: EDWARD A. BROWN, JAMES P. CALVE, and
LYNNE H. BROWNE, Administrative Patent Judges.

BROWNE, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appeal 2012-001787
Application 12/271,303

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Thilivhali Tshikovhi Ndou and Neville Sonnenberg (Appellants)
appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a rejection of claims 1-17. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM.

CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
The claims are directed to a skin engaging member for a razor
cartridge. Claims 1 and 11 are independent. Claim 1 is reproduced below:
1. A skin engaging member in the form of a narrow elongated
strip of dimensions suitable for placement on a razor cartridge,
said skin engaging member comprising
a first uppermost layer comprising an erodible skin
engaging layer of a first color, said first layer comprising a
lubricious water-soluble polymer,
a second layer positioned below said first layer
comprising an erodible skin engaging layer of a second color
different from said first color, said second layer comprising a
lubricious water-soluble polymer, said second layer comprising
a greater amount of said lubricous water-soluble polymer, in
percent by weight, than said first layer, and
a third layer positioned below said second layer
comprising an erodible skin engaging layer of a third color
different from said first color and said second color.

PRIOR ART
Doroodian-Shoja Siamk
Welsh
Kwiecien
US 5,388,331
US 5,603,161
US 6,301,785 B1
Feb. 14, 1995
Feb. 18, 1997
Oct. 16, 2001

Appeal 2012-001787
Application 12/271,303

3
GROUNDS OF REJECTION
1. Claims 1, 5, 8-12, and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as
being unpatentable over Welsh.
2. Claims 2-4 and 13-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being
unpatentable over Welsh and Doroodian-Shoja Siamak.
3. Claims 6, 7, and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Welsh, Doroodian-Shoja Siamak, and Kwiecien.

OPINION
Claims 1, 5, 8-12, and 16
Appellants argue claims 1, 5, 8-12, and 16 as a group. See App. Br.
3-4. We select independent claim 1 as the illustrative claim and claims 5, 8-
12, and 16 stand or fall with claim 1. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)
(2011).
The Examiner finds that Welsh discloses all of the elements of
independent claim 1 including a third layer 74; however, the Examiner
determines that Welsh’s third layer is not “an erodible skin engaging layer of
a third color different from said first color [of the first layer] and said second
color [of the second layer].” Ans. 5. The Examiner further finds that
“Welsh teaches layers having lubricous water-soluble polymer for
lubricating the skin.” Id. In addition the Examiner finds “motivation to
have a third layer having an erodible skin engaging layer with different color
can be found in [Welsh’s] specification.” Final Rej. 5; see Ans. 8 (citing
Welsh, col. 6, ll. 12-21).
Appellants note that “[l]ayer 74 of Welsh is an adhesive layer used to
adhere the shaving aid composite 60 to the cartridge 20.” App. Br. 3-4. As
Appeal 2012-001787
Application 12/271,303

4
such, Appellants argue that Welsh avoids using lubricious water-soluble
polymers in the third layer because such materials will compromise the
adhesive properties of the third layer which are needed to secure the strip to
the razor cartridge. See App. Br. 4.
While, we agree with Appellants that it would not have been obvious
to modify Welsh’s adhesive layer 74 to include water-soluble polymer; we
also agree with the Examiner that Welsh teaches a multiple-layer visual wear
indicator, thus rendering a third erodible skin engaging layer of a third color
different from the first layer’s color and the second layer’s color obvious as
discussed infra. As first noted by the Examiner on pages 4-5 of the final
Office action, Welsh states “the EVA shaving aid composite 60 of the visual
wear indicator may be formed in a multiple layer construction, wherein
different layers exhibit different colors.” Welsh, col. 6, ll. 12-16. The
Examiner determines that this “paragraph shows [that] the layer construction
is not limited to two layers, but rather [] multiple layers which include three
or more layers [are contemplated by Welsh].” Ans. 8. We agree. Thus,
while Welsh explicitly discloses two erodible skin engaging layers each
having a different color (see e.g. Welsh, Fig. 10), Welsh’s broad teaching of
multiple erodible skin engaging layers (Welsh, col. 6, ll. 12-16) provides a
reason with rational underpinning to include a third erodible skin engaging
layer (in addition to the adhesive layer 74) having a different color from the
first and second layers. Claim 1 does not preclude the presence of Welsh’s
adhesive layer 74 in such structure.
Accordingly, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claim 1, and
claims 5, 8-12, and 16 which fall therewith.

Appeal 2012-001787
Application 12/271,303

5
Claims 2-4 and 13-15
Appellants argue “Siamak does not disclose or suggest a third layer
comprising an erodible skin engaging layer missing from Welsh.” App. Br.
4.
Appellants’ argument is not persuasive as Welsh suggests a third layer
as discussed supra. Appellants do not present separate arguments for the
patentability of claims 2-4 and 13-15. Accordingly, we sustain the
Examiner’s rejection of these claims.
Claims 6, 7, and 17
Appellants argue “the combination of Welsh and Kwiecien does not
disclose a third layer comprising an erodible skin engaging layer.” App. Br.
5.
Appellants’ argument is not persuasive for the reasons discussed
supra. Accordingly, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of these claims.

DECISION
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-17 is AFFIRMED.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).

AFFIRMED

Klh