Ex Parte FORSTOVA et al - Page 8



              Appeal No. 1998-0667 Page 8                                                                         
              Applicatiorr No. 081280,306                                                                         
                           On the basis of animal studies, and controlled testing in a limited                    
                    number of humans (referred to as Phase I testing), the Food and Drug                          
                    Administration may authorize Phase II clinical studies. See 21 U.S.C.                         
                    5 355(i)(I); 21 C.F.R. § 31 2.23(a)(5), (a)(8) (1 994). Authorization for a                   
                    Phase II study means that the drug may be administered to a larger                            
                    number of humans, but still under strictly supervised conditions. The                         
                    purpose of the Phase II study is to determine primarily the safety of the                     
                    drug when administered to a larger human population, as well as its                           
                    potential efficacy under different dosage regimes. See 21 C.F.R.                              
                    § 312.21(b).                                                                                  
                           FDA approval, however, is not a prerequisite for finding a                             
                    compound useful within the meaning of the patent laws. Scott, 34 F.3d                         
                    1058, 1063, 32 USPQ2d 1 1 15, 1 120. Usefulness in patent law, and in                         
                    particular in the context of pharmaceutical inventions, necessarily includes                  
                    the expectation of further research and development. The stage at which                       
                    an invention in this field becomes useful is well before it is ready to be                    
                    administered to humans. Were we to require Phase II testing in order to                       
                    prove utility, the associated costs would prevent many companies from                         
                    obtaining patent protection on promising new inventions, thereby                              
                    eliminating an incentive to pursue, through research and development,                         
                    potential cures in many crucial areas such as the treatment of cancer.                        
              While the claims involved in Brana were directed to chemical compounds taught to be                 
              useful in treating cancer, we believe these principles can be applied to the claims at              
              hand directed to methods of gene therapy, especially in light of the examiner's apparent            
              holding that gene therapy in general is non-enabled.                                                
                    The references relied upon by the examiner themselves document various                        
              clinical trials of gene ,therapy techniques. One example is found in Wagner which                   
              states "[cllinical trials are now in progress to evaluate the therapeutic potential of              
              antisense [oligodeoxynucleotides] in several human diseases . . .." Wagner, page 333,               

              first full paragraph. Miller states at page 197, right-hand column, "[olf the gene therapy          
              protocols that have so far entered clinical trials . . .." Marshall sets forth a table at page      








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007