Interference No. 103,675
Marsili, there was a showing filed during the prosecution of the
application in question to support the proposed change in the
disclosure from a generic "2-halo" substituent, which included both "-
and ß-fluoro substituents, to a 2-"-halo substituent.
In our view, the first filed Chen et al.
application is evidence that at the time Chen et al. filed their
application the disclosure therein would have reasonably conveyed to
the skilled routineer that fluorination of taxol with DAST, a known
fluorination reagent, would have reasonably been expected from Chen et
al.'s disclosure and from the knowledge possessed by the skilled
organic chemist at the time of filing, to yield a mixture of 7-
fluorine epimers as described and obtained in the Chen et al.
examples. Indeed, the following exchange from Dr. Kingston, a witness
for Chen et al., is informative on this point:
Q. In 1992, Professor Kingston, a reaction of DAST with 2
prime protected Taxol, is it fair to say that one would
expect that that reaction would yield fluorination at the
seventh position of the compound?
A. That would be a reasonable expectation based on
knowledge of DAST chemistry.
32
Page: Previous 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007