Appeal No. 95-3387
Application No. 08/005,942
need be said by appellants in relation to the obviousness-type
double patenting rejection at this stage of prosecution.
Rejections based on 35 U.S.C. § 103
Claims 1-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Schmatz alone or in the alternative over '310 Pat. or '067
Pat. in combination with Michel.
The examiner's grounds of rejection are set forth on
pages
4 and 5 of the Examiner's Answer to which we refer for the
examiner's presentation of the reasons for rejection.
Schmatz discloses a genus of compounds which is inclusive
of a number of species contained within the genus of claim 1
herein, with the exception of the hydroxyproline residue.
Schmatz discloses a 3-hydroxy-4-methylproline, while the
instantly claimed compounds do not contain a methyl group on
the 4th carbon of the proline residue. Appellants pointed to
this distinction in response to the first action and submitted
two declarations pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.132. The declarations
address properties of hexapeptidyl echinocandin derivatives
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007