Appeal No 94-1046
Application 07/747,456
the compound of the copending application is at the 5,
9, or 13 positions. The compound of the copending
application has a methyl group at the 5, 9, or 13
position instead of ethyl. Since ethyl is a next
higher homologue of methyl, the claimed compound is
an obvious variant of the compound claimed in the
copending application.
The examiner’s finding is clearly erroneous. The difference
between the claimed compound and the compound of the copending
application lies not only at the 5, 9, or 13 position of
macrolactam aglycone ring of the claimed antibiotics but also in
the difference between the 3-amino-3,6-dideoxytalopyranose isomer
which is attached to C-6 of the macrolactam aglycone ring of the
compound claimed in this application and the 3-amino-3,6-
dideoxymannopyranose isomer which is attached to C-6 of the
macrolactam aglycone ring of the compound claimed in the
copending application. As we indicated with respect to the
examiner’s rejection of Claims 1-9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view
of the teaching of Japan 59-18035, the examiner has not
established that a disclosure of one isomer would have enabled
persons skilled in the art to make and use the other.
4. Conclusions
We reverse all the examiner’s rejections.
REVERSED
- 10 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007