Interference No. 104,396.
Page 7
reason for the difference in claim scope between the "comprising (-)-enantiomee' and the
"admixture of the (-) and (+) enantiomer" is due to the specific notice provided by the applicant
that the admixture claim places no limit on the amount of specifically recited M-enantiome ,
whereas the "comprising (-)-enantiomer" claim, read in light of the evidence presented, indicates
that the parties have notified the public that the term (-)-enantiomer, by and of itsel cannot
contain more than 5 weight percent of the corresponding (+)-enantiomer.
The Counts and the Parties' Claim Correspondence
The counts in this interference are as follows:
Count 4. A method of treating hepatitis B virus infection and/or inhibiting hepatitis
B virus replication in a patient in need thereof comprising: administering
to said patient an effective amount of BCH- 189 or a phartaccutically
acceptable salt, ester or salt of an ester thereof
Count 5. A method of treating hepatitis B virus infection and/or inhibiting hepatitis
B virus replication in a patient in need thereof comprising: administering
to said patient a composition comprising an effective amount of (-)-cis-4
arnino- I -(2-hydroxymethyl- 1,3-oxathiolan-5-yl)-(l H)-pyrimidin-2-one or
a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, ester or salt of an ester thereof, wherein
the composition contains no more than about 5 weight percent of the
corresponding (+) enantiomer, and wherein the weight percent is based on
the total combined weight of the (-) and (+) enantiomers.
(Paper No. 233, p. 5.1)- ý
The parties' claims corresponding to Count 4 are:
Cheng, Application 08/463,960: 41,45,49,54,58,62,66,74,86,98,107,
113, 122, 134, 146, 156-159, 170-173, 175
176, 178-81-8, 187, 193, 199, 202, 205, 211,
217,223,225
Belleau, U.S. Patent 5,532,246: 1-3 and 6-9
Belleau Application 09/585,43 1: 1-3, 6-9, 10, 12, 14
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007