Ex Parte BOCK et al - Page 8




              Appeal No. 2003-0913                                                                          8                
              Application No. 09/277,049                                                                                     

              administered perorally to rats and other warm blooded animals.  See column 13, lines                           
              31-47 and column 15, lines 49-57.  The meloxicam is administered in dosage unit form                           
              consisting essentially of an inert pharmaceutical carrier and one effective dosage unit of                     
              the active ingredient in the form of tablets or powders.  Id.  We further find that                            
              Examples 20 through 22 disclose a tablet containing meloxicam in combination with                              
              corn starch, polyvinylpyrrolidone, magnesium stearate, and colloidal silicic acid among                        
              other components.  We further find that these components fall within the scope of                              
              carriers and excipients identified in the specification.  See specification, page 9, lines 5-                  
              6 which discloses examples of carriers and excipients including magnesium stearate,                            
              crosslinked polyvinyl pyrrolidone and various starches and the examples which disclose                         
              soluble polyvinyl pyrrolidone.  Based upon the above findings and analysis, we conclude                        
              that the teachings and disclosure of Trummlitz establish a prima facie case of                                 
              anticipation with respect to the claimed subject matter.                                                       
              A discussion of Luger is not needed in reaching our decision.                                                  
              The Rejection under § 103(a)                                                                                   
              We shall also affirm the rejection of the claims as unpatentable over Trummlitz.  It                           
              is well settled that the ultimate obviousness is lack of novelty.  The claims cannot have                      
              been anticipated and not have been obvious.  In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792, 794, 215                          
              USPQ 569, 571 (CCPA 1982).                                                                                     










Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007