Appeal No. 94-4129
Application 07/953,439
Volume 39, pages 963-968 (1967), for the proposition that
“galanthamine has only one tenth of the activity of
neostigmine which has the same activity as physostigmine”
(Brief on Appeal, page 7, second full paragraph). While we
find in Wislicki a statement that “the potency of neostigmine
[as an anesthetic] is considered to be ten times as great [as]
. . . galanthamine” (Wislicki, page 965, column 2, last
paragraph), we cannot find a statement that “neostigmine . .
. has the same activity as physostigmine” anywhere in Wislicki
or in the specification. To the contrary, appellant’s
specification teaches at pages 4-5, bridging paragraph):
Due to its pharmacological properties galanthamine
belongs
to the group of the reveribly [sic, reversibly] acting
cholinesterase inhibitors. The effects of galanthamine
are similar to those of physostigmine and neostigmine,
however, it has additional special effects. The
therapeutic range
of galanthamine is 3 to 6 times larger than that of
physostigmine or neostigmine, because of its lower
toxicity (Paskov, D.S., ed. Springer-Verlag, Berlin -
Heidelberg - New York - Tokyo, 653-672 (1986).
Moreover, the specification also teaches at page 5:
In contrast to neostigmine, galanthamine overcomes the
blood-brain barrier and opposes the cerebral effect of
cholinergic poisons. Galanthamine has the effect of
awakening the patient from the twilight sleep caused by
scopolamine (Baraka, . . . J. Amer. Med. Assoc. 238,
2293-2294 (1977).
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007