Appeal No. 2002-2228 Page 5
Application No. 09/555,906
understand this argument, it is that there are other, known drugs to treat “symptoms of
withdrawal that can be found in common with other diseases,” but not those symptoms
unique to withdrawal. This argument is without merit. Again, claim 11 does not require
alleviation of any particular symptoms of withdrawal - it certainly does not require
alleviation of symptoms seen only in withdrawal (if indeed there are any such
symptoms). Moreover, while there may be many “reliable medicine[s]” for relieving
headache, anxiety, depression and confusion (symptoms common to withdrawal and
“other diseases”), we fail to see how that would have a bearing on whether one skilled
in the art would administer ginkgo biloba extracts to alleviate those symptoms.
On this record, we find that the examiner has provided evidence sufficient to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness for claim 11, which appellant has not
adequately rebutted. As discussed above, claims 2-8, 10, 12 and 13 stand or fall with
claim 11. Accordingly, we affirm the examiner’s rejection of claims 2-8 and 10-13 under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007