Appeal No. 2005-0416 Page 2
Application No. 09/970,020
acceptable salt thereof and a heteropolysaccharide and
polysaccharide gum excipient.
The references relied upon by the examiner are:
Baichwal et al. (Baichwal) 4,994,276 Feb. 19, 1991
Gilbert et al. (Gilbert) WO 98/40053 Sep. 17, 1998
GROUND OF REJECTION
Claims 24-54 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Gilbert in view of Baichwal.
We affirm.
CLAIM GROUPING
According to appellants (Brief, page 3), “[c]laims 24-54 stand or fall
together.” Since all claims stand or fall together, we limit our discussion to
representative independent claim 24. Claims 25-54 will stand or fall together with
claim 24. In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 590, 18 USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir.
1991).
DISCUSSION
According to the examiner (Answer, page 3), Gilbert teaches “a bi-layer
tablet that has a controlled release and immediate release profile for tramadol.”2
Specifically, Gilbert teaches (page 5, lines 3-9),
a preferred dosage form for administration of tramadol is one in
which (-)-tramadol is in immediate-release form and (+)-tramadol is
in a sustained-, or controlled-release form. In this case, the release
rate of the (+)-enantiomer could be controlled in such a way to
2 Appellants recognize (Brief, page 3), “Gilbert teaches a dosage form having separate portions
(e.g., a bi-layer tablet), each portion containing one enantiomer of a chiral drug (e.g., tramadol…).
The enantiomers are released from the dosage form at different rates.” See also, Reply Brief,
page 2.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007