Ex parte KOSLEY JR. et al. - Page 5




          Appeal No. 1997-2188                                                        
          Application 08/137,440                                                      
                                                                                     
          Claim 29. A method of treating memory dysfunction                           
                    characterized by decreased cholenergic [sic,                      
               cholinergic] function which comprises administering                    
               to a mammal an acetylcholinesterase inhibiting                         
               amount of the compound of Claim 1.                                     
                                                                                     
              Claim 30. A method of treating memory dysfunction                      
               characterized by decreased cholinergic function                        
               whith [sic, with] 6-O-demethylgalanthamine which                       
               comprises      administering to a mammal an acetyl-                    
               cholinesterase inhibiting compound of Claim 4.                         
                                   RELATED APPEALS                                    
               On page 3, lines 1 through 8 of their brief, appellants                
          direct our attention to two, related appeals which, according               
          to appellants, relate to the same issues as herein involved.                
          The related appeals involve U.S. Application Serial Number                  
          08/137,443, filed on October 15, 1993 (Appeal Number 1997-                  
          2182); and U.S. Application Serial Number 08/137,444, filed on              
          October 15, 1993 (Appeal Number 1997-2167).                                 
               The claims in this application differ from the claims in               
          the two related applications chiefly in the description of the              
          substituent R .  Decisions in the two related appeals were2                                                              
          mailed on even date with this opinion.                                      
                                   THE REJECTIONS                                     
               Claims 1 through 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.  112,                
          first paragraph, on the grounds the specification fails to                  

                                          5                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007