Interference 102,413 Page 34
Pitha v. Muller
solubilization of drugs with the Sz-111 product. Thus, the
Sz-111 product alone fails to describe an embodiment within
the scope of the count.
Upon review of Pitha’s brief, Dr. Pitha’s declaration,
Dr. Szente’s declaration, testimony and laboratory notebook,
we have determined that Pitha has not established a prima
facie reduction to practice of an embodiment falling within
the scope of the count. The products Sz-11, Sz-20 and Sz-28,
appearing in Dr. Szente’s laboratory notebook, have been
described as forming a cyclodextrin derivative. We have not
been directed to evidence which exhibits that these products
comprise cyclodextrin derivatives. Consequently, pages Sz-32,
Sz-34, Sz-36, Sz-40 and Sz-41, which describe the
solubilization of a drug with the product from Sz-11, Sz-20 or
Sz-28, all fail to disclose the process for producing products
which meet all of the limitations of the count.
Page: Previous 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007