Appeal No. 1997-2828
Application No. 08/087,548
The appellants point to several insufficiencies in the cited references which
support the position of lack of proper motivation to combine the cited references to
arrive at the claimed invention. For instance, the appellants argue that Asato
specifically teaches utilizing water-soluble solvents and water miscible solvents to
prepare pour-on formulations. Appellants also submit that O’Sullivan and Maienfisch
fail to describe the particular non-aqueous pour-on formulations claimed as they
suggest water emulsion based concentrates which can be used as pour-on
formulations.
Similarly, appellants argue that Abber describes a solid, cross-linked,
polymerized, pressure sensitive adhesive composed of the combination of a
methyl/phenyl siloxane gum, a dimethyl siloxane gum, an organopolysiloxane resin and
a catalyst. Abber indicates polybutene resin may be optionally added to the adhesive
composition prior to curing to produce greater tack and better adhesion of the
polymerization product and provides nitroglycerin as a representative pharmaceutical to
be delivered. Column 6, lines 30-33; column 8, Table II. “[T]here is no teaching or
suggestion that the polybutene can be used apart from the solid adhesive device in
liquid form.” Reply Brief, page 4. For this reason, appellants argue that “the
description of polybutene in a solid, transdermal device would not motivate the artisan
of ordinary skill to employ polybutene in the present case without more direction in the
art.” Reply Brief, page 5. We agree.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007