Appeal No. 2001-1685
Application No. 08/596,698
expectation of success to one reasonably skilled in the art. In re Vaeck, 947 F.2d 488,
493, 20 USPQ2d 1438, 1442 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
Iverson addresses the same problem as that of the claimed invention, the
treatment and prevention of fibrin formation in the eye, such as after surgery, by
administration of heparin, an anticoagulant. Bang teaches the general administration of
protein C systemically to reduce vascular fibrin formation, but does not teach
administration of protein C systemically or otherwise to treat the eye.
It is the examiner=s position that (Answer, page 4):
Iverson teaches that the intraocular fibrin formation during
Vitrectomy is inhibited by heparin (note the abstract and page 405). Iverson
does not specifically teach the use of protein C. ....
The use of protein C to reduce the fibrin formation or the treatment
of a disease resulting from such fibrin formation, instead of heparin taught
by Iverson would have been obvious to an artisan since Bang teaches its
superiority over heparin taught by Bang.
Put in another way: Iverson teaches that intraocular fibrin is the
result of blood coagulation and can be reduced in an individual by
administering heparin as the anticoagulant.
Bang teaches that protein C is a better anticoagulant than heparin.
Therefore, it would be prima facie obvious to substitute protein C for the
heparin of Iverson as an anticoagulant with a reasonable expectation of
success that it too would reduce intraocular fibrin formation.
Appellants argue that “a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have had a
reasonable expectation that protein C would have a pharmacological effect in the eye.”
Brief, page 6. In support of this position appellants argue that “delivery of therapeutic
pharmaceuticals to the eye is not a trivial matter. In many instances, systemically
administered drugs do not reach the eye in therapeutic levels; and ... [m]any drugs, if
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007