Appeal No. 95-0576
Application 08/035,546
natural methods described in Mrozik and GB may be used as
starting compounds for synthesizing compounds structurally
similar at the 25-position by conventional chemical methods with
reasonable expectation of retaining, or producing new compounds
which also exhibit, antiparasitic utility. Put simply, the
record is devoid of any evidence in support of the proposition
that persons skilled in the art would have been enabled by the
prior art cited of record to make the compounds appellants claim
without undue experimentation. Absent evidence which would
indicate that the claimed compounds might be synthesized from
their prior art homologues without undue experimentation with
reasonable expectation of antiparasitic utility, the prior art of
record would not have placed the compounds appellants claim in
the possession of the public. Based on the evidence in this
case, we cannot assume that the natural prior art methods for
making the compounds indicated also can be used to naturally
produce structurally similar compounds. The references
themselves refute the proposition.
Having determined that the examiner has not established a
prima facie case of obviousness of Claims 1-3, 17, 28, 33-35, and
40 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of the teaching of Mrozik alone,
or in view of the combined teachings of GB and Mrozik, we need
not consider the evidentiary weight to be accorded the
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007