Ex Parte BONI et al - Page 2



              Appeal No. 2001-2661                                                                 Page 2                
              Application No. 09/164,350                                                                                 
                     1.  A method for producing multilamellar coalescence vesicles (MLCVs)                               
              containing a biologically active compound, said method comprising:                                         
                            incubating small unilamellar vesicles (SUVs), large unilamellar vesicles                     
                     (LUVs) or mixture thereof with at least one biologically active compound in an                      
                     aqueous solution at a temperature above the temperature of the pretransition of                     
                     the lipid component for a time sufficient to form MLCVs containing said at least                    
                     one biologically active compound;                                                                   
              wherein said method is performed without the use of an organic solvent, a freeze-                          
              thawing step or a dehydration step.                                                                        

                                               The Prior Art Reference                                                   
                     In rejecting the appealed claims on prior art grounds, the examiner relies on the                   
              following reference:                                                                                       
              Popescu et al. (Popescu)                                                                                   
                     (PCT Application)           WO 97/29769                  Aug. 21, 1997                              


                                                      The Issues                                                         
                     The previously entered rejection of claims 1, 4 through 16, and 22 under                            
              35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, has been withdrawn (Examiner's Answer, page 2,                          
              section (6)).                                                                                              
                     The issues remaining for review are: (1) whether the examiner erred in rejecting                    
              claims 1 and 4 through 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) as anticipated by Popescu; and                          
              (2) whether the examiner erred in rejecting claims 1 and 4 through 22 under 35 U.S.C.                      
              § 103(a) "as being unpatentable over [Popescu] cited and for the reasons set forth                         
              above by itself or in combination with applicant's statements of prior art [references                     
              cited in the specification, page 8]" (Examiner's Answer, page 4, first full paragraph).                    







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007