Appeal No. 98-1591
Application 08/417,625
Lilly’s example 17 (exhibit 10, page 18, line 56), six tests
produced both clavulanic acid and cephamycin C which,
appellants indicate, is one of Lilly’s desired products
(brief, page 9), whereas in six tests, neither clavulanic4
acid nor cephamycin C was made. In the remaining three5
tests, the data are inconclusive. That is, in experiment 6
R204 batches 50/4 and 50/8, the imidazole assay and bioassay
showed no production of clavulanic acid or cephamycin C. The
HPLC analysis, however, indicated that cephamycin C, but not
clavulanic acid, was present. In experiment R204 batch 50/6,
no clavulanic acid was detected by use of the imidazole assay,
whereas clavulanic acid was detected by HPLC and cephamycin C
was detected by use of both the bioassay and HPLC. It appears
that the test results which indicated the presence of
cephamycin C in batches 50/4 and 50/8, and the test results
4Experiment R201, batches 50/6, 50/7 and 50/8; experiment
R204, batches 50/3, 50/5 and 50/7. In experiment R204,
batches 50/5 and 50/7, the imidazole and bioassay both showed
no clavulanic acid, whereas the HPLC test indicated the
presence of both clavulanic acid and cephamycin C.
5Experiments R202 and R203.
6Experiment R204, batches 50/4, 50/6 and 50/8.
-7-7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007