Appeal No. 95-2220
Application No. 08/059,682
discloses at page 2, lines 18-20 that it is advisable to take
the prior art composition “a day before the onslaught of the
menstrual period.” Further, the claimed language “a method
for treating symptoms associated with premenstrual syndrome
comprising administering to an individual having symptoms
associated with premenstrual syndrome symptomatology” does not
patentably distinguish the claims from the process of
administering a combination of calcium and vitamin D to an
individual for relief from menstrual stresses as taught by
Barron. Accordingly, based on the disclosures in Barron, the
subject matter defined by appealed claim 1 herein would have
been obvious within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103.
With respect to appealed claim 2, Barron discloses that
calcium carbonate is a preferred form of calcium. With
respect to appealed claim 3, Barron prefers a fish oil source
of
vitamin D which is a cholecalciferol form of vitamin D. See
the brief at page 6. Appealed claim 4 calls for administering
the composition orally in the form of a tablet in a single
daily dose, while Barron prefers (page 1, lines 125 to page 2,
line 6) a single daily dose of vitamin D in capsule form and
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007