Appeal No. 95-4823
Application 07/856,012
5. Appellants’ discussion of other references.
At pages 12-13 of the Appeal Brief, appellants discuss other references of record
which they believe are relevant in determining the patentability of the claims on appeal.
Once again, the examiner has ignored a substantative portion of the Appeal Brief. This
constitutes yet another error on the part of the examiner. In re Hedges, supra.
The rejection is reversed.
Other Issue
Notwithstanding our disposition of the examiner’s rejection, there are significant
issues of patentability present in this record which have not been properly considered by
the examiner. We direct attention to Pino Capote. This reference describes administering
diazepam either intravenously or by eye drop into the conjunctival sac of cats in order to
determine if diazepam will decrease intraocular pressure. Diazepam is a GABA agonist
according to the present invention. See page 4, lines 27-28 of the supporting
specification. Pino Capote reports that diazepam was found to significantly reduce
intraocular pressure by either mode of administration.
In comparing the subject matter of claim 11 on appeal with the described procedure
in Pino Capote, it is not clear whether the diazepam was present in the compositions used
by Pino Capote "in the range of approximately 0.1 to 5 per cent weight by volume" as
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007