Appeal No. 2006-0819 Page 6
Application No. 09/929,862
Appellant’s arguments are not found to be convincing. Deninno, although
disclosing a large genus of compounds of Formula I, see id. at 2-6, specifically
teaches the claimed species, i.e., [2R, 4S]-4-[(3,5-bis-trifluoromethyl-benzyl)-
methoxycarbonyl-amino]-2-ethyl-6-trifluoromethyl-3,4-dihydro-2H-quinoline-1-
carboxylic acid ethyl ester, see id. at 9, lines 25-26 and claim 6. Moreover,
Deninno reasonably suggests the claimed composition. That is, Deninno
teaches a pharmaceutical composition comprising a CETP inhibitor of Formula I
and a second compound, which is preferably a HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor or a
MTP/Apo B secretion inhibitor. See id. at 29, lines 21-32 and claims 39 and 40.
Among the preferred HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors is atorvastatin. See id. at
page 30 and claim 41. Thus, Deninno specifically teaches a composition
comprising a CETP inhibitor of Formula I, wherein the claimed CETP inhibitor,
i.e., [2R, 4S]-4-[(3,5-bis-trifluoromethyl-benzyl)-methoxycarbonyl-amino]-2-ethyl-
6-trifluoromethyl-3,4-dihydro-2H-quinoline-1-carboxylic acid ethyl ester, is
specifically taught by the reference, and a second compound comprising a HMG-
CoA reductase inhibitor, with atorvastatin being preferred. Thus, there is a
teaching or suggestion provided by the combination of references to select these
particular drugs and combine them into a single pharmaceutical composition. In
addition, as noted by the examiner, Roth teaches the presently claimed salt
forms and hydroxy acid forms of atorvastatin, and teaches that they are effective
HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, and thus the combination of Dennino and Roth
teaches the presently claimed composition.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007