Appeal No. 2000-0599
Application No. 08/357,363
claims when the claims are read in light of the specification. See Orthokinetics, Inc. v.
Safety Travel Chairs, Inc., 806 F.2d 1565, 1576, 1 USPQ2d 1081, 1088 (Fed. Cir.
1986).
Turning to the specification (page 5), we find the following passage to be
instructive:
[A] preferred compound of the present invention is the compound of
formula (A) [ 9-(4-hydroxy-3-hydroxymethylbut-1-yl) guanine] or a salt or
acyl derivative thereof.
In a further aspect of the invention there is provided a compound of
formula (A) in a purity state of greater than 60% preferably greater than
80% more preferably greater than 90% and particularly preferably more
than 95% by weight of pure compound.
In yet a further aspect of the invention, there is provided an isolated,
substantially completely pure compound of formula (A), or a
pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof.
Thus, the specification indicates that the invention encompasses the compound,
9-(4-hydroxy-3-hydroxymethylbut-1-yl) guanine, or its salt, in various states of purity:
e.g., Ain a purity state of greater than 60%,@ Agreater than 80%,@ Agreater than 90%,@
Amore than 95% by weight of pure compound,@ and finally, Ayet a further@ level of purity -
Asubstantially completely pure.@ Given this progression, we believe that one skilled in
the art would understand claims 45 and 46 to require a level of purity more stringent
than Amore than 95% by weight of pure compound.@ Like the ubiquitous term Aabout,@
Athe term >substantially= is a descriptive term commonly used to >avoid a strict numerical
boundary to the specified parameter.=@ Ecolab Inc. v. Envirochem Inc., 264 F.3d 1358,
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007