Ex Parte Turner et al - Page 9


              Appeal No. 2004-1040                                                          Page 9                       
              Application No. 09/770,643                                                                                 

              claim to polypropylene.  The U.S. application on appeal in Ziegler claimed priority to a                   
              German application filed in 1954.  “In the German application, Ziegler disclosed only                      
              that solid granules of polypropylene could be pressed into a flexible film with a                          
              characteristic infrared spectrum and that the polypropylene was ‘plastic-like.’”  Id. at                   
              1203, 26 USPQ2d at 1605.  “Ziegler did not assert any practical use for the                                
              polypropylene or its film, and Ziegler did not disclose any characteristics of the                         
              polypropylene or its film that demonstrated its utility.”  Id.  The court held that the                    
              German application did not satisfy the requirements of § 101 and therefore could not be                    
              relied on to overcome a rejection based on an intervening reference.  See id., 26                          
              USPQ2d at 1606.  “[At] best, Ziegler was on the way to discovering a practical utility for                 
              polypropylene at the time of the filing of the German application; but in that application                 
              Ziegler had not yet gotten there.”  Id., 26 USPQ2d at 1605.                                                
                     On the other hand, the CCPA reversed a rejection for lack of utility in In re Jolles,               
              628 F.2d 1322, 206 USPQ 885 (CCPA 1980).  The applicant in Jolles claimed                                  
              pharmaceutical compositions that were disclosed to be useful in treating acute                             
              myeloblastic leukemia.  See id. at 1323, 206 USPQ at 886.  The active ingredients in                       
              the compositions were closely related to daunorubicin and doxorubicin, both of which                       
              were “well recognized in the art as valuable for use in cancer chemotherapy.”  Id., 206                    
              USPQ at 887.  The applicant also submitted declaratory evidence showing that eight of                      
              the claimed compositions were effective in treating tumors in a mouse model, and one                       
              was effective in treating humans.  See id. at 1323-24, 206 USPQ at 887-88.  The court                      
              noted that the data derived from the mouse model were “relevant to the treatment of                        
              humans and [were] not to be disregarded,” id. at 1327, 206 USPQ at 890, and held that                      





Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007