Appeal No. 1997-1280 Page 4
Application No. 08/356,912
present claims. See Brief, page 3. However, on the record before us there are three
Declarations of Michel Fortin.
The first Declaration submitted, February 8, 1995, as part of a preliminary
amendment compares N-[2,3-dihydro-2-(1-pyrrolidinyl)-1H-inden-1-yl]-3,4-dimethoxy-N-
methyl-benzene- acetamide, representative of the prior art, with N-[2,3-dihydro-2-(1-
pyrrolidinyl)-1H-inden-1-yl]-4-trifluoromethyl-N-methyl-benzene- acetamide, compound 5 of
the specification and N-[2,3-dihydro-2-(1-pyrrolidinyl)-1H-inden-1-yl]-2,4-dinitro-N-methyl-
benzene- acetamide, compound 18 of the specification. Declarant tested the ability of the
compounds as analgesics by measuring the concentration of the product necessary to
displace 50% of specific radioactivity fixed on the receptor studied. The tests showed that
the examples of the invention, compounds 5 and 8, needed to be present in a far smaller
concentration than the dimethoxy compound of the prior art.
The second Declaration, submitted July 20, 1995, made the same comparison using
the same prior art compound, examples 5 and 18 of the specification, but additionally
included Example 28 of the specification, N-[2,3-dihydro-2-(1-pyrrolidinyl)-1H-inden-1-yl]-4-
nitro-N-methyl-benzene- acetamide. Declarant again tested the ability of the compounds as
analgesics by measuring the concentration of the product necessary to displace 50% of
specific radioactivity fixed on the receptor studied. The tests likewise showed that the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007