Appeal No. 2001-0163
Application No. 08/951,502
CITED REFERENCES1
As evidence of unpatentability, the Examiner relies on the following
references:
Yamashita et al. (Yamashita) 5,126,055 Jun. 30, 1992
Ikeda (Ikeda ‘852) 5,354,852 Oct. 11, 1994
Ikeda2 (Ikeda ‘635) WO 92/15635 Sep. 17, 1992
(Published PCT Application)
The Examiner rejected claims 11 to 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated
by or in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Yamashita. The
Examiner also rejected claims 11 to 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over the
combination of Yamashita, Ikeda ‘852 and Ikeda ‘635. (Answer, pp. 3-4).
1 In rebuttal to the Examiner’s rejections, the Appellant cites the following references:
Okamoto et al. (Okamoto) 4,861,872 Aug. 29, 1989
Negawa et al., “Optical Resolution by Simulated Moving-Bed Absorption Technology”, J.
Chromatography 590:113-117 (1992).
Nagamatsu et al., “Optical resolution of pharmaceutical intermediate by Simulated Moving Bed”
Chiral Europe ‘96 (1996).
2 We will rely on the translation of the this document which has been filed in the record.
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007