Appeal No. 95-3387
Application No. 08/005,942
which compare an echinocandin derivative with 4-methyl-3-
hydroxyproline as the sixth residue against 19 compounds which
are echinocandin derivatives with 3-hydroxyproline residues as
the sixth residue. The examiner responded in the Final
Rejection (Paper #9, pages 2 and 3) taking the position that
the use of a broken line, in association with the methyl group
of the hydroxyproline residue at columns 33 and 34 of Schmatz,
suggested that the methyl can be a leaving group or that it
can be cleaved. The examiner also stated at page 3 of the
Final rejection that:
Further, it is well established in the art
that a hydroxyproline residue containing
a methyl or a hydrogen atom (i.e., desmethyl)
are known to be functionally equivalent.
...Thus, applicants' arguments, the
declarations of Mr. Bartizal, Jr. and
Balkovec are of no probative value
and are insufficient to overcome the 103
rejection since the comparison is not done
with the disclosure identical (not similar)
to that of the reference.
The examiner takes the same position with respect to '310
Pat., '067 Pat. and Michel, because these publications also
depict dotted lines in association with the methyl group on
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007