Appeal No. 2002-0869
Application No. 08/580,384
references Snyder and Howard, submitted with respect to the issue of expectation of
success in the copending application to support their position with evidence.
In addition, appellants argue in the current record that Esmon does not teach the
presence of TNF in the ocular environment, and provides no evidence that the
biochemical cascade of events associated with inflammation and TNF occurs in either
the aqueous or vitreous humor of the eye. Brief, page 9. Upon return of the application
to the examiner, if the examiner determines it appropriate to maintain the obviousness
rejection in view of the currently cited references, the examiner should make of record
evidence confirming that the biochemical cascade of events associated with
inflammation and TNF occurs in the eye.
CONCLUSION
We vacate the rejections of claims 22-27 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for
obviousness over Galin or Iverson in view of Bang and Esmon, and of claims 28-29
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for obviousness over Galin or Iverson in view of Bang and
Esmon in further view of Stocker. Upon return of the application, the examiner should
take a step back and review the record in copending appeal Serial No. 08/696,698
(Appeal No. 2001-1685) with respect to the issue of expectation of success and other
matters consistent with the discussion herein.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007