Ex Parte Williams et al - Page 2


              Appeal No.  2005-0902                                                                    Page 2                 
              Application No. 09/529,053                                                                                      

                      The examiner relies on the following references:                                                        
              Weithmann et al. (Weithmann)                 5,556,870                    Sep. 17, 1996                         
              Coghlan et al. (Coghlan)                     WO 94/24095                  Oct.  27, 1994                        
              McChesney et al. (McChesney), “An Evaluation of Leflunomide in the Canine Renal                                 
              Transplantation Model,” Transplantation, Vol. 57, No. 12, pages 1717-1722 (1994).                               
              Flamand et al. (Flamand), “Human Herpesvirus 6 Induces Interleukin-1ß and Tumor                                 
              Necrosis Factor Alpha, but Not Interleukin-6, in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cell                              
              Cultures,” Journal of Virology, Vol. 65, No. 9, pages 5105-5110 (1991).                                         
              Hammer, ”Advances in Antiretroviral Therapy and Viral Load Monitoring,” AIDS, Vol. 10                           
              (suppl. 3), pages S1-S11 (1996).                                                                                

                      Claims 16-21, 24, and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious in                             
              view of Coghlan and McChesney.                                                                                  
                      Claims 22 and 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious in view of                             
              Coghlan, McChesney, and Hammer.                                                                                 
                      Claims 16, 17, 20, 21, 24, and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                               
              obvious in view of Weithmann.                                                                                   
                      Claims 22 and 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious in view of                             
              Weithmann and Hammer.                                                                                           
                      Claim 19 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious in view of                                    
              Weithmann and Flamand.                                                                                          
                      We affirm the rejection based on Coghlan and McChesney and the rejection                                
              based on Weithmann and Hammer.  We do not reach the remaining rejections.                                       










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

Last modified: November 3, 2007