Appeal 2007-1378
Application 10/327,459
1 The real party in interest is Pfizer Inc.
2 The Examiner rejected the claims on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
3 as being unpatentable over Tenengauzer. (The reader should know that no
4 references to et al. are made in this opinion.)
5 The Examiner also rejected the claims on appeal under 35 U.S.C.
6 § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Singer and Curatolo.
7 The following prior art relied was relied upon by the Examiner.
8
9 Name Patent Number Issue Date
10 Curatolo US 5,605,889 25 Feb 1997
11 Singer US 6,365,574 B2 02 Apr 2002
12 Tenengauzer US 6,764,997 20 Jul 2004
13
14 Curatolo is prior art vis-à-vis appellants under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
15 Singer is prior art vis-à-vis appellants under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) based
16 on Singer’s filing date of 30 November 1999, appellants’ filing date being
17 20 December 2002.
18 Tenengauzer is prior art vis-à-vis appellants under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)
19 based on Tenengauzer’s filing date of 18 October 2002, appellants’ filing
20 date being 20 December 2002.
21 In this appeal, appellants have not attempted to antedate Singer or
22 Tenengauzer. Accordingly, for the purpose of this appeal, Singer and
23 Tenengauzer are prior art.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013