Ex Parte HAGER et al - Page 2




             Appeal No. 2001-1265                                                                                    
             Application No. 08/612,074                                                                              
                    25.   An aqueous liposome system comprising at least one phospholipid, a non-                    
             phospholipidic substance selected from the group consisting of cholic acid, deoxycholic                 
             acid, ursodeoxycholic acid, chenodeoxycholic acid, glycocholic acid, taurocholic acid,                  
             and their respective sodium and ammonium salts, and, optionally, a non-toxic organic                    
             solvent, the mass ratio of said phospholipid to said non-phospholipidic substance being                 
             in the range between 1:0.001 and 1:0.1, wherein the diameter of liposomes in said                       
             liposome system is in the range between 35 and 90nm.                                                    
                    The references relied upon by the examiner are:                                                  
             Weder (Weder 1)                          4,731,210                 March 15, 1988                     
             Weder, H.G. (Weder 2), AThe Preparation of Variably Sized Homogenous Liposomes                          
             for Laboratory, Clinical, and Industrial Use by Controlled Detergent Dialysis,@ Liposome                
             Technology, Chapter 7, pp. 79-107.                                                                      
             Lichtenberg, D., ALiposomes: Preparation, Characterization, and Preservation,@                          
             Methods of Biochemical Analysis, Vol. 33, pp. 337-462 (1988)                                            

             Grounds of Rejection                                                                                    
                    Claims 25-36 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. ' 103(a) as obvious over Weder 1,                    
             Weder 2 or Lichtenberg, by themselves or in combination.   We reverse.                                  


                                                   DISCUSSION                                                        
                    In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to                  
             the appellants= specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the               
             respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.                                    
                    Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                    
             the appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the                            



                                                         2                                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007