Appeal No. 1997-1816
Application No. 08/178,269
compounds have an OH at this position" (page 5 of Answer).
However, the examiner reasons that since Chenard '343
discloses compounds similar in structure to those of Frost
having the same utility wherein H and OH are interchangeable
at the 4-position of the heterocyclic ring, it would have been
obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute an
OH group at the R position of Frost.4
Appellant maintains that the examiner has improperly
focused only on the 4-position of the piperidinyl moiety while
ignoring "all the other differences which exist between
Frost's compounds and Chenard's compounds in an effort to make
out a prima facie case of obviousness" (page 25 of principal
brief). In particular, appellant contends "Frost also does
not even suggest combining the benzo-fused moieties disclosed
as part of his compounds with the type of moieties disclosed
by Chenard." Also, appellant submits that "Chenard does not
teach or suggest combining portions of their compounds with
the benzo-fused moieties disclosed by Frost" (page 25 of
principal brief).
Appellant's argument goes to the heart of the examiner's
position that the compounds of Frost and Chenard '343 are
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007