Appeal No 94-1046
Application 07/747,456
use appellants’ antibiotic compound without appellants’
disclosure.
In his declaration filed March 26, 1992 (Declaration of Min
Chu (Chu), Paper No. 26), Chu declares (Chu, pp. 2-3):
THAT, the structural formula of the antibiotic
AB-85 . . . of the Japanese patent . . . [has] the
formula 2 of this Application . . .[; and]
THAT, based on information and belief and my
expertise in synthetic organic chemistry, I am aware of
no synthetic chemical method in existence as of August 3,
1988 of synthesizing the compound of this invention . . .
except by the fermentation of Actinomadura vulgaris subsp
vulgaris of this invention . . . .
In short, Min Chu declares that he knows of no method of
preparing antibiotics including the 3-amino-3,6-dideoxytalo-
pyranose radical which is attached as the talopyranoside to C-6
of the macrolactam aglycone of this invention from antibiotics
including the 3-amino-3,6-dideoxymannopyranose radical which is
attached as the mannopyranoside to C-6 of the macrolactam
aglycone AB-85 (Chu, page 3).
Faced with Chu’s declaration, the examiner responded as
follows (Examiner’s Answer, pp. 6-7):
Even though the Japanese patent does not disclose the
structural formula of antibiotic AB-85, it would have
been within the ordinary skill in the art at the time
the instant invention was made to determine the same using
conventional techniques for structural analysis. As
shown on page 3 of the Declaration by Dr. Puar, the
only difference between the claimed compound and the
reference’s compound is the position of hydroxy group
at the 4'-position on a sugar moiety. . . .
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007