Ex Parte Matzinger et al - Page 17


                 Appeal No.  2003-2146                                                        Page 17                  
                 Application No.  09/546,143                                                                           
                 set forth in appellants’ claims 25 and 26 are obvious in view of a disclosure of the                  
                 trans- and cis-isomers of the generic formula set forth on column 9 of Barbier.                       
                 This is error.  Ochiai at 1572, 37 USPQ2d at 1133 (“reliance on per se rules of                       
                 obviousness is legally incorrect and must cease.”).                                                   
                        We recognize, as set forth in In re Deuel, 51 F.3d 1552, 34 USPQ2d 1210                        
                 (Fed. Cir. 1995), that a prima facie case of obviousness based on structural                          
                 similarity may arise if the “[s]tructural relations provide the requisite motivation or               
                 suggestion to modify known compounds to obtain new compounds.  For                                    
                 example, a prior art compound may suggest its homologs because homologs                               
                 often have similar properties and therefore chemists of ordinary skill would                          
                 ordinarily contemplate making them to try to obtain compounds with improved                           
                 properties.”  Id. at 1558, 34 USPQ2d at 1214.  See also, e.g., In re Payne, 606                       
                 F.2d 303, 313, 203 USPQ 245, 254 (CCPA 1979) (“An obviousness rejection                               
                 based on similarity in chemical structure and function entails the motivation of                      
                 one skilled in the art to make a claimed compound, in the expectation that                            
                 compounds similar in structure will have similar properties.”).  However, as set                      
                 forth in In re Doyle, 63 USPQ2d 1161, 1162 (Fed. Cir. 2002), footnote omitted,                        
                               Like a human hand, a chiral molecule cannot be                                          
                        superimposed on its mirror image, otherwise known as its                                       
                        enantiomer.  Altering the relative orientation of the groups bonded                            
                        to the various chiral centers of a molecule (i.e., creating a different                        
                        stereoisomer of the compound) can have profound effects on the                                 
                        compound’s properties, especially with respect to how the                                      
                        compound interacts with other chiral molecules.                                                
                        Thus, assuming arguendo that it would have been prima facie obvious to a                       
                 person of ordinary skill in the art to separate the cis- and trans-conformations of a                 
                 compound of formula III in Barbier, the examiner failed to identify any evidence                      





Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007