Appeal No. 2001-1264 Page 8
Application No. 08/819,630
patients are to be treated according to that to the process of Yokohari is seen in that the
adsorbent having an anionic functional group of that reference is stated to adsorb
rheumatoid factor (RF) which is associated with rheumatoid arthritis. See, e.g., column
1, lines 41-50.
It cannot be gainsaid that body fluids of patients suffering from RA contain
chemokines. Appellants admit as much at page 4, lines 24-32 of the present
specification. Thus, it appears reasonable to conclude that body fluids from RA
patients containing RF to be treated in Yokahari will also contain chemokines. In other
words, there is no evidence of record that RA patients whose condition has progressed
to the point that they are presenting RF would not also of necessity be presenting
chemokines. Thus, bringing an adsorbent which comprises a solid material having an
anionic functional group into contact with body fluid of a patient suffering from RA for
the purpose of removing RF as described in Yokohari will also of necessity remove the
chemokines which appear to be present in such body fluid as now required by claim 7
on appeal. This is seen in that claim 7 only requires the broad manipulative step of
bringing the body fluid in contact with an adsorbent which comprises a solid material
having an anionic functional group. That is the same step described by Yokohari and
since it appears that the same patient is to be treated by both Yokohari and the present
invention, i.e., RA patients, it is reasonable to expect that the same result will be
achieved, removal of chemokines as well as RF.
As set forth in In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936
(Fed. Cir. 1934)(citations omitted), “[i]t is the general rule that merely discovering and
claiming a new benefit of an old process cannot render the process again patentable.”
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007