Appeal No. 1996-2431
Application 08/008,186
4
2. A peptide of Claim 1 wherein Q is Q .
3
5. A peptide of Claim 1 wherein Q is A(Q ).
4
13. A peptide according to Claim 2 wherein Q is D- or L-Mel, CPC or
methotrexoyl.
14. A peptide according to Claim 5 wherein A is 6-aminohexanoyl or glutaryl, and
3
Q is 2-anthraquinonyl-methylenoxy, doxorubicinyl or methotrexoyl.
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Sela et al. (Sela) 4,263,279 Apr. 21, 1981
Rivier et al. (Rivier) 4,652,550 Mar. 24, 1987
Stevens 4,713,366 Dec. 15, 1987
Anderson et al. (Anderson) 5,169,933 Dec. 8, 1992
Lin et al. (Lin), “2-Methylanthraquinone Derivatives as Potential Bioreductive Alkylating
Agents,” J. Med. Chem., Vol. 23, pp. 1237-1242 (1980).
Varga, “Hormone-Drug Conjugates,” in Methods in Enzymology, Vol. 112, pp. 259-269
(1985).
Bajusz et al. (Bajusz), “Highly potent analogues of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone
containing D-phenylalanine nitrogen mustard in position 6,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA,
Vol. 86, pp. 6318-6322 (August 1989).
Channabasavaiah et al. (Channabasavaiah), “New Potent Agonist and Antagonist Analogs
of Luteinizing Hormone Releasing Hormone,” Peptides, Proceedings of the Sixth
American Pept. Symp., E. Gross and J. Meienhofer (eds.), pp. 803-806.
The claims stand rejected as follows:
I. Claims 1 through 4 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Channabasavaiah, Bajusz and Rivier.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007