Appeal No. 2007-0091
Application No. 09/765,491
Appellant argues that, notwithstanding Deutch’s definition of
angiogenesis as including formation of lymph vessels, angiogenesis and
lymphangiogenesis are different processes. Appellant cites Jussila7 and
argues that it “establishes the important differences between angiogenesis
and lymphangiogenesis. . . . [T]hey are not the same, and a reference to one
would not lead one to assume the same with respect to the other, and
certainly not that a drug effective in one condition would be effective in the
other condition.” (Br. 14-15)
We agree with Appellant that the evidence of record does not support
the Examiner’s position that those skilled in the art would expect inhibitors
of angiogenesis to also inhibit lymphangiogenesis. Jussila states that
“[b]lood and lymphatic vessels develop in a parallel, but independent
manner.” Abstract. Jussila also states that pathological angiogenesis and
pathological lymphangiogenesis are involved in different disorders. “One of
the most extensively studied forms of pathological angiogenesis is “tumor
angiogenesis. . . . Angiogenesis also takes place in other pathological
conditions such as proliferative retinopathy, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis,
and juvenile hemangioma.” Page 676. By contrast,
[a]bnormal function of the lymphatic vessels is implicated in
diseases such as lymphedema, inflammation, infectious and
immune diseases, fibrosis, ascites, and tumors such as Kaposi’s
sarcoma and lymphangioma/lymphangiomatosis . . . . [as well
as] in tumor metastasis.
Page 677.
7 Jussila et al., “Vascular growth factors and lymphangiogenesis,” Physiol.
Rev., Vol. 82, pp. 673-700 (2002).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013