Appeal 1997-3391
Application 08/212,578
32. By using a sustained-release system, "[e]xcess
drug concentrations are minimized and steady long-term release of
the drug is maximized" (col. 3, lines 43-45).
33. Eichel explicitly suggests that sustained-release
systems are useful for "analgesics" other than aspirin (col. 4,
lines 4-11). Flupirtine is an analgesic (Finding 4).
34. Eichel mentions 8-hour sustained release systems
(col. 4, line 45) and 12-hour sustained release systems (col. 8,
line 30).
B. Discussion
According to applicants, the prior art does not make out a
prima facie case of obviousness. We disagree.
The use of sustained-release systems to administer drugs is
well-known. There are numerous reasons recognized the art for
their use. Elimination of frequent dosages (Eichel, col. 1,
lines 27-29) and minimizing excess drug concentration in the body
at any particular time (col. 3, lines 43-45) are benefits of a
sustained-release system. Optimal absorption of a drug is also a
benefit (Tamás, col. 2, lines 41-43). The benefits are
applicable to the administration of analgesics (Eichel, col. 4,
lines 10-11) and flupirtine is a known analgesic.
But, applicants contend that there is no reason to combine
the teachings of Lobisch with sustained-release art such as
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007