And Appeal No 94-1146
Application 07/746,050
Since methyl is a next higher homologue of ethyl,
the claimed compounds are obvious variants of the
compound claimed in the copending application.
The examiner’s finding is clearly erroneous. The difference
between the claimed compounds 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-dideoxymannopyranose 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-dideoxytalopyranose isomer which is attached to C-6 of the
macrolactam aglycone ring of the compound claimed in the
copending application. In addition to the previously stated
reasons for reversing the examiner’s rejection of Claims 1-12
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of the teaching of Japan 59-
18035, the examiner also 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
- 9 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007