Appeal No. 95-0976
Application No. 07/936,558
BACKGROUND
Claims 1-12 are drawn to compounds which are derivatives
of known cyclohexapeptidyl compounds. These compounds are
known in the art as echinocandins. Claims 13 and 14 are drawn
to antibiotic compositions comprising the compounds of claim
1.
The compounds that were starting materials for the
production of the claimed compounds are echinocandin
hexapeptidyl compounds extracted from microbial fermentates.
These parent compounds and their antibiotic activity were
known prior to the filing date of this application.
DISCUSSION
Rejection based on 35 U.S.C. § 112
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, as having been based on a non-enabling disclosure.
Although phrased various ways the position of the
examiner is that the single in vivo example of the claimed
antibiotic activity is inadequate to provide the necessary
guidance to one of skill in the art to practice the invention
across the scope of the claim. The claims at issue encompass
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007