Appeal No. 94-3575
Application 07/929,044
through 13, disclosing the use of ethanol. According to the
examiner, Sablotsky discloses removing 85 to 95% of the ethanol
(column 10, lines 11 through 13), and thus implies retaining 5 to
15% which meets the terms of the claims. See the Examiner’s
Answer, page 3, first paragraph, and page 5, lines 1 through 4.
As correctly pointed out by appellants, however, Sablotsky’s
multi-step method is not complete until the cross-linked adhesive
containing pharmaceutically active drug is transferred to a
coating station. There, Sablotsky discloses a heating means to
remove water and/or solvents which may have been included in the
mixing procedure; and
(11) after the heating is completed and the
solvents are removed, the first component
layer will be firmly adhered to the second
component layer and the system can be wound
into rolls for storage.
See Sablotsky, column 9, lines 20 through 27. Considering the
Sablotsky patent in its entirety, we agree with appellants that
(1) Sablotsky discloses removing ethanol in the coating station,
and (2) the examiner’s reliance on Sablotsky’s interim step of
removing only 85 to 95% ethanol (column 10, lines 11 through 13)
is misplaced. Appellants argue this point strenuously in their
Reply Brief, pages 1 and 2. In response, the examiner states
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007