Appeal No. 1999-1703
Application No. 08/313,194
skilled in the art to which it pertains or with which it is most nearly connected to make
and/or use the invention.
The examiner argues that the specification lacks a teaching of the amounts and
which aldose reductase inhibitor or hypoglycaemic agents are to be used in applicants'
claimed invention. Answer, page 3.
Appellants respond to this argument, stating that
The invention of claim 13 lies in recognizing that A-II antagonists are
useful in combination with other known agents used for treating or preventing
impaired neuronal conduction velocity... [P]ersons skilled in the art wishing
to treat or prevent impairment of neuronal conduction velocity could easily
select a suitable known aldose reductase inhibitor or hypoglycaemic agent,
and could readily select a suitable quantity to be used in the combination of
claim 13.
Brief, page 16.
The examiner fails to directly respond to the argument of appellants that persons
skilled in the art wishing to treat or prevent impairment of neuronal conduction velocity
could easily select a suitable known aldose reductase inhibitor or hypoglycaemic agent,
and could readily select a suitable quantity to be used in the combination of claim 13,
stating only that “there are various unrelated compounds which are so classified and there
is a lack of teaching in the specification of which species would have the claimed effect.”
Answer, page 4.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007