The opinion in support of the decision being entered today
is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte BUCHI REDDY REGURI and SUDHAKAR SUNKARI
__________
Appeal 2007-0313
Application 10/414,447
Technology Center 1600
__________
Decided: September 6, 2007
__________
Before TONI R. SCHEINER, ERIC GRIMES, and NANCY J. LINCK,
Administrative Patent Judges.
Opinion by GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judge. Concurring and
dissenting opinion by LINCK, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 involving claims to specific
crystal forms of valsartan. The Examiner has rejected the claims as
nonenabled, indefinite, anticipated, and obvious. We have jurisdiction under
35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse all of the rejections.
BACKGROUND
Valsartan is a known compound (Specification ¶ 4) that “is used in the
treatment of cardiovascular complaints such as hypertension and heart
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013