Appeal No. 1996-2419
Application No. 08/282,129
groups would not have been recognized as "interchangeable" at
the time the invention was made, i.e., hydrolyzable under mild
conditions in the manner taught by Holton in column 11, lines
60 through 68.
The examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
reversed.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, for the reasons set forth in the body of
this opinion, we do not sustain the examiner's rejection of
claims 1 through 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 20 through 22 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Holton. Nor do we
sustain the rejection of claims 1 through 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, and
20 through 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the
combined disclosures of Holton and Greene.
The examiner's decision is reversed.2
REVERSED
2In view of our disposition of this appeal, we find it
unnecessary to discuss whether Holton's intermediate compounds
6 distinguish from the claimed compounds at the 2N position of
the taxane molecule; or whether Holton discloses or suggests
that intermediate compounds 6 possess pharmaceutical activity.
-10-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007