Appeal No. 2001-0400
Application No. 08/751,624
Claims 1-15, 19-22, 24, and 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
obvious over Heinmets.
Claim 16 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over
Heinmets in combination with either of Sugiyama or Hodgson, and Bio-Rad.
We reverse all of the rejections.
Background
Appellants’ specification discloses a method for inactivating viruses in
blood and blood products. In the disclosed method, a phenothiazine dye is
added to the blood product and the dye-containing blood product is irradiated
with visible light. See page 1. The specification states that
phenothiazine dyes, particularly methylene blue (MB), neutral red,
thionine, and toluidine blue (TB) are of special interest because
they may, in combination with visible light, inactivate a number of
viruses, including some viruses which do not possess a lipid
envelope, e.g. adenovirus.
Page 3. The dye may be removed from the treated blood product using any of
several adsorbing agents. Specification, pages 21-22.
Discussion
1. The nonenablement rejection
The claims are directed to a method of inactivating viruses in a blood
product by adding a phenothiazine dye (at a final concentration of 0.5 µM to 2
µM) to a blood bag containing the blood product and irradiating with visible light.
(see the Advisory Action mailed June 18, 1998, Paper No. 11) but was entered after Appellants
filed a request for a Continued Prosecution Application. See Paper No. 12, filed July 17, 1998,
and the Office Action mailed August 6, 1998 (Paper No. 15). Thus, claims 17 and 18 are no
longer pending. As noted above, the appeal of claims 23 and 26 has been dismissed.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007