Ex Parte METCALF et al - Page 7

             Appeal No. 94-2842                                                                                   
             Application 07/882,351                                                                               

             (page 696) and Lampman I (page 964, Table 1) disclose use of                                         
             phenylethanol as an volatile attractant for southern corn                                            
             rootworm, and Lampman (page 964, Table 1) also discloses use of                                      
             p-anisyl alcohol (i.e., 4-methoxyphenyl alcohol) for the same                                        
             purpose.  Two of the volatile attractants recited in appellants’                                     
             claims 8 and 9 are phenylpropanol, which is an adjacent homolog                                      
             of phenylethanol, and 4-methoxyphenyl ethanol, which is an                                           
             adjacent homolog of 4-methoxyphenyl propanol.  Adjacent homologs,                                    
             due to their structural similarity, are expected to have similar                                     
             properties.  See In re Henze, 181 F.2d 196, 201, 85 USPQ 261, 265                                    
             (CCPA 1950).  Consequently, it would have been prima facie                                           
             obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the                                          
             teachings by Andersen and Lampman I, together with the teaching                                      
             by Metcalf discussed above, to use either phenylpropanol or 4-                                       
             methoxyphenyl ethanol in combination with a cucurbitacin in a                                        
             bait for southern rootworm.  Appellants’ argument (brief, pages                                      
             30-31) that In re Grabiak, 769 F.2d 729, 731-32, 226 USPQ 870,                                       
             872 (Fed. Cir. 1985), is to the contrary is not persuasive                                           
             because the compounds in that case were not adjacent homologs.                                       
                    Appellants argue that none of the volatile attractants                                        
             recited in appellants’ claims 8 and 9 is a homolog of the prior                                      
             art northern corn rootworm attractants (brief, page 39).  This                                       

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

Last modified: November 3, 2007