Appeal No. 1997-2756
Application 08/242,728
which the currently claimed method is premised. However, claim 6 does not require a
particular pharmacological effect, but is directed to a method of treating asthma by
administering an antithrombin agent. As urged by the examiner, Roth teaches the
treatment of asthma with a substance which is also described as having antithrombin
activity.
Appellants urge that Roth does not teach the use of an antithrombin agent within the
meaning of the present invention. (Principal Brief, pages 8-9). Appellants contend that
(id.):
the normal activities of thrombin to which Appellants are
referring, are "-thrombin-induced effects upon human ASM
cells, specifically cytosolic calcium release and smooth muscle
cell proliferation.
However, claim 6 does not reflect a limitation of this nature. Claim 6 is directed to a
method of treating asthma and related symptoms comprising administering an effective
amount of an antithrombin agent. At page 7 of the Specification, appellants state that "[b]y
'antithrombin agent' is meant to include any compound which deters the normal activities
evoked by the presence of thrombin." (Emphasis added.) The declaration of Dr. Panettieri
(Paragraph 4) urges that the pharmacological activity of nedocromil sodium is not
antithrombin activity. Yet, this is inconsistent with appellants' own specification and it is
with reference to the specification that one must interpret the claims. See In re Sneed, 710
F.2d 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983)("It is axiomatic that, in
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007