The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 15
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte MICHAEL J GAST
__________
Appeal No. 2001-18191
Application No. 08/886,072
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before WINTERS, WILLIAM F. SMITH, and ADAMS, Administrative Patent Judges.
ADAMS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the examiner’s
final rejection of claims 1-17 and 23-29, which are all the claims pending in the
application.
Claim 1 is illustrative of the subject matter on appeal and is reproduced
below:
1. A method of contraception which comprises administering to a
female of child bearing age a combination of a progestin at a daily dosage selected
from the group consisting of 40-500 Tg trimegestone, and 250 Tg – 4 mg
dienogest, and an estrogen at a daily dosage equivalent in estrogenic activity to 1-
20 Tg ethinyl estradiol for 23-25 days beginning on day 1 of the menstrual cycle, and
1 We find this appeal is related to Appeal No. 2001-1023 (Application No. 08/887,163), accordingly
we have considered them together.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007