Appeal No. 1997-2356
Application 08/109,798
Claim 1 is illustrative of the claims on appeal and reads as follows:
1. An aqueous pharmaceutical formulation comprising: (a) biologically active
nerve growth factor; (b) biologically acceptable salt in an amount sufficient to maintain
isotonicity; (c) a buffer in an amount sufficient to maintain the pH of the formulation from
about 4.5 to about 6.0; and (d) water.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:
Finkenaur et al. (Finkenaur) EP 0 308 238 March 22, 1989
Pignatti et al. (Pignatti) “Solution Properties of $ Nerve Growth Factor Protein and Some
of Its Derivatives,” Journal of Neurochem., Vol. 25, pp. 155-159 (1975)
Wang et al. (Wang) “Parenteral Formulations of Proteins and Peptides: Stability and
Stabilizer,” Journal of Parenteral Science and Technology Vol. 42, pp 271-273 (1970)
Diem et al. (Diem) Scientific Tables 7th ed., pp. 271-273, 280-281 and 528-529 (1970)
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the
appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the examiner's
Answer (Paper No. 18, August 19, 1996) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support
of the rejection, and to the appellants’ Brief (Paper No. 17, April 18, 1996) for the
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007