Appeal No. 1997-1670
Application 08/098,942
BACKGROUND
The invention is described by applicant, at page 9 of the specification, as being
directed to antisense oligonucleotides which have been constructed and are targeted to
bind nucleic acid sequences encoding Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF)
thereby blocking production of the expression of VEGF. VEGF is stated to play an integral
role in angiogenesis associated with a variety of pathological conditions.
DISCUSSION
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103
Claims 8-15 and 23-24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over the
combination of Uhlmann, Peterson, Kim, Foulkes, Claffey, Tischer, and page 4 of the
applicant's specification.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner bears the initial burden of
presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24
USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Only if that burden is met, does the burden of
coming forward with evidence or argument shift to the applicant. Id. In order to meet that
burden the examiner must provide a reason, based on the prior art, or knowledge
generally available in the art as to why it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007