Interference No. 104,241
Indeed, TLC cannot establish the identity of the compound
synthesized because TLC does not possess that qualitative
capability for a single, unknown compound . Moreover, absent5
any additional evidence in their original submission which
confirms the identity of what compound was actually
synthesized by Jeon, Dhar could not have known what the
identity of the reaction product obtained by Jeon was or
identified its structure based solely on his mere visual
observation let alone that the reaction produced a compound
having the formula depicted on the notebook page. Suffice it
to say that the notebook itself lacks any evidence indicative
of a contemporaneous in time recognition by either Jeon or
Dhar of the identity of the compound Jeon actually
synthesized.
Jeon et al.'s argument that their original showing "did
not need to be under 37 C.F.R. § 1.608(b) because the count
had not yet been defined" (page 4 of Paper Number 3) ignores
5
While Cupps et al. refer to Jeon et al.'s "representation" of a TLC plate
as a "photo", Jeon et al. merely describes it as a "representation". From the
page reproduced from the notebook it appears to this Board that the
representation is merely a sketch. Nevertheless, whether a "photo" or a
sketch, TLC is not a qualitative tool unless an unknown product and a known
sample of a desired product are eluted on the same plate.
29
Page: Previous 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007