Appeal No. 1998-0143
Application No. 08/268,177
has not pointed to any evidence of record disclosing or suggesting that one of ordinary
skill in the art would have had a reasonable basis for expecting the claimed microspheres
to be ingested by, i.e., directly delivered to, any and all cells of the CNS, whether neurons
or glial cells. Therefore, based upon this record, we reverse the rejection of claims 12-15
over claims 1-11 of the '610 patent.
OTHER MATTERS
According to appellants, the Declaration of record has not been executed by
inventor Deborah L. Dillon because she is deceased (See the Submission of Documents
letter filed September 2, 1994). The file does not currently contain a supplemental
declaration executed by the administrator/executor of Ms. Dillon's estate.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner (I) to reject claims 11-15 under 35
U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph, is reversed, (II) to reject claim 11 under the- judicially
created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting over claims 1-11 of U.S. Patent
No. 5,360,610 is affirmed, and (III) to reject claims 12-15 under the judicially created
doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting over claims 1-11 of U.S. Patent No.
5,360,610 is reversed.
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007