Ex parte MARGIT NAGY et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 95-2924                                                          
          Application 08/061,356                                                      



               The examiner relies upon the following references as                   
          evidence of obviousness:                                                    
          Mygind et al. (Mygind)           4,385,048          May  24, 1983           
          Grohe                            4,844,902          July  4, 1989           
          Purewal et al. (Purewal)         5,225,183          July  6, 1993           
                                                      (filed Jan. 30, 1991)           
          Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to an aerosol                     
          preparation comprising sodium cromoglycate as the active agent              
          and oleyl oleate as the dispersing agent.                                   
               Appealed claims 1-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as            
          being unpatentable over Purewal in view of Grohe.  In addition,             
          claims 7-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as being                    
          unpatentable over Purewal and Grohe in view of Mygind.                      
               We have carefully reviewed the respective positions advanced           
          by appellants and the examiner, including appellants’                       
          specification evidence of nonobviousness.  As a result, we concur           
          with appellants that the claimed aerosol preparation would not              
          have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the            
          meaning of 35 U.S.C.  103 in view of the applied prior art.                
          Accordingly, for essentially the reasons expressed by appellants            
          in the principal and Reply Briefs on appeal, we will not sustain            
          the examiner’s rejections.                                                  
               Purewal, the primary reference, discloses an aerosol                   
          formulation comprising the presently claimed active ingredient,             
                                         -2-                                          




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007