Appeal No. 95-3387
Application No. 08/005,942
BACKGROUND
Claims 1-9 and 13-15 are drawn to compounds which are
derivatives of known cyclohexapeptidyl compounds. These
compounds are known in the art as echinocandins. Claims 10
and 11 are drawn to antibiotic compositions comprising the
compounds of claim 1. Claim 12 is drawn to a method of
administering a therapeutic amount of a compound set forth in
claim 1 to a mammal to control microbial infection.
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
Obviousness-type Double Patenting
Claims 1-15 stand provisionally rejected under the
judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting
as lacking patentable distinction over (1) Claims 1-17 or (2)
Claims 1-4 or (3) Claims 3-20 or (4) Claims 4-7 or (5) Claims
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007