Appeal 1997-3391
Application 08/212,578
effects, either for prior art flupirtine compounds or
pharmaceutical compositions with the scope of the invention.
13. Thus, on this record all we have is applicants'
assertion that side effects are reduced when the compositions of
claim 1 are used as an analgesic.
The examiner's rejection
14. A final rejection was withdrawn in the Examiner's
Answer, where a new ground of rejection was entered (Examiner's
Answer, page 3).
15. The examiner has rejected claims 1-7 as being
unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Lobisch, U.S. Patent
5,162,346 (1992), Tamás, U.S. Patent 4,748,023 (1988) and Eichel,
U.S. Patent 5,238,686 (1993).
16. Applicants timely filed a reply brief responding
to the examiner's new ground of rejection.
17. There was no further response by the examiner.
Lobisch
18. Lobisch reveals that flupirtine "is an analgesic,
i.e., it causes an insensibility to pain without anesthesia or
loss of consciousness" (col. 1, lines 11-15).
19. In fact, flupirtine is said to have "a pronounced
analgesic effect" (col. 2, lines 23-24).
20. According to Lobisch (col. 2, lines 1-6):
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007