Appeal No. 2004-0394 Page 10
Application No. 09/915,467
original, Abrams, teaches, “[a] pharmaceutical delivery package comprising a mixture of
[i]sotretinion and an oral contraceptive.” Thus, “a person of ordinary skill in the art
would have been motivated to package8 isotretinioin together with a contraceptive.” Id.
As set forth on page 10 of the Decision, “[o]nce another supplied the key
element, there was no long-felt need or, indeed, a problem to be solved.” Newell
Companies v. Kenney Mfg. Co., 864 F.2d 757, 768, 9 USPQ2d 1417, 1426 (Fed. Cir.
1988). For the foregoing reasons, as well as the reasons set forth in the Decision, both
Elsayed and Abrams individually supply the key element to satisfy the long-felt need.
Accordingly, both Elsayed and Abrams, individually or combined, support our finding of
fact and conclusion of law that “the long-felt need was recognized and satisfied by
another before the date of appellant’s invention.” Decision, page 10.
8 We note that appellant defines “packaged together” as “a unitary package for sale as an undivided unit.”
See appellant’s Specification, page 9.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007