Appeal No.2001-1258 Page 12
Application No. 08/413,805
claim language supports such a limited construction. For example, claim 4 does
not require that the claimed composition contain an amount of truncated
GA733-2 that is therapeutically effective for the treatment of any specific disease.
Nor does the specification provide a definition of “pharmaceutically effective
amount” that would distinguish the claimed composition from the one made
obvious by the prior art. It is well-established that “in proceedings before the
PTO, claims in an application are to be given their broadest reasonable
interpretation consistent with the specification.” In re Sneed, 710 F.2d
1544,1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983). So interpreted, claim 4 reads
on the composition suggested by the examiner’s references.
Summary
The references cited by the examiner support a prima facie case of
obviousness, which has not been effectively rebutted. We therefore affirm the
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007