Appeal No.1997-0466
Application 08/154,158
The disclosure of Pinnell is discussed herein. The examiner recognizes that Pinnell
does not disclose the addition of a non-ionic surfactant to its composition for the treatment
of cicatrix. The examiner relies on Cawston for establishing evidence that the stability of
collagenase is enhanced by detergents such as Brij 35 and Triton X-100 which may be
employed in the purification of collagenase. From this disclosure, the examiner concludes
that the addition of a detergent for the purpose of enhancing the stability of collagenase
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
made, and the incorporation of the composition into a kit would have been obvious as it is
conventional in the pharmaceutical industry to package individual pharmaceutical
compositions usable in the treatment of given conditions together. Answer, page 5.
However, Cawston fails to overcome the deficiencies of Pinnell and its failure to
disclose the claimed concentration of hyaluronidase. A prima facie case of obviousness
has not been established by the examiner. The rejection is reversed.
35 U.S.C. 103
Claims 16-22 and 61-70 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Pinnell and
Longo in view of Baert.
The examiner relies on Pinnell as evidence that hyaluronidase is known in the art for
use in human medicine to increase the effect of local anesthetics and to permit wider
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007