Ex Parte Davis - Page 3


                  Appeal No. 2006-3204                                                               Page 3                     
                  Application No. 10/057,629                                                                                    

                  . . . employing . . . ezetimibe with simvastatin, a HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor                               
                  and/or cholestyramine, . . . to treat sitosterolemia.”  Id. at 4.                                             
                          Belamarich is cited for teaching that “hypercholesterolemia is one of the                             
                  manifestation[s, sic] of sitosterolemia,” and that a low-sterol diet, as well as                              
                  cholestyramine, are effective in lowering sterol and cholesterol levels in                                    
                  sitosterolemic patients.  Id.                                                                                 
                          The examiner concludes:                                                                               
                                 It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art                                 
                          at the time the invention was made to employ ezetimibe with                                           
                          simvastatin and/or cholestyramine, . . . to treat sitosterolemia.                                     
                                 One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to                                  
                          employ ezetimibe with simvastatin and/or cholestyramine, . . . to                                     
                          treat sitosterolemia.  [Rosenblum] teaches the combination of                                         
                          simvastatin and ezetimibe as useful in reducing cholesterol level.                                    
                          Employing the combination of simvastatin and ezetimibe in a                                           
                          method to reduce cholesterol level and thereby treating                                               
                          sitosterolemia, a condition known to have elevated cholesterol                                        
                          level, would have been reasonably expected to be effective, absent                                    
                          evidence to the contrary.  Moreover, cholestyramine is known to be                                    
                          effective in lowering cholesterol in sitosterolemic patient.                                          
                          Therefore, administering all three compounds concomitantly for the                                    
                          very same purpose would have been obvious to one of ordinary                                          
                          skill in the art (See In re Kerkhoven, 205 USPQ 1069).                                                
                  Id. at 4-5.                                                                                                   
                          “In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner bears the initial                            
                  burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness.  Only if that burden is                               
                  met, does the burden of coming forward with evidence or argument shift to the                                 
                  applicant.”  In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir.                              
                  1993) (citations omitted).  The test of obviousness is “whether the teachings of                              
                  the prior art, taken as a whole, would have made obvious the claimed invention.”                              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013