*** [claim] 37 ***" (Final Rejection, Paper 8, page 2, Examiner's
Answer, page 3).
15. The examiner also found that Hamilton discloses
(1) "that the compounds may be administered in
compositions" (Final Rejection, Paper 8,
page 2) and
(2) "a pharmaceutical composition *** comprising
these compounds" (Examiner's Answer, page 3).
16. The examiner's findings are supported by
substantial evidence.
17. Hamilton describes compounds within the scope of
claim 37 (see, e.g., the formula at col. 3, lines 1-9).
18. The compounds described by Hamilton are said to be
useful in combination with a "pharmaceutically-acceptable
carrier, adjuvants and vehicles" (col. 12, lines 34-35).
19. The PCT application goes on to say that the
compounds may be administered as "topical formulations" (col. 13,
lines 24-29).
20. In what can be characterized at best as a
half-hearted effort, applicants in the Appeal Brief (Paper 11,
pages 3-4) argue as follows with respect to the examiner's
rejection based on the PCT application:
According to the Examiner, *** [the PCT application]
discloses compounds of some of the rejected claims and their
use in compositions. Office action of 5/7/2, p. 3, ll. 1-8.
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007