Appeal No. 2006-0872 Page 3
Application No. 09/899,704
healing such as proliferation following injury, including eye injury,
that is caused by a variety of conditions, including toxic substances.
Examiner’s Answer, page 4.
“In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner bears the initial
burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. Only if that burden is
met, does the burden of coming forward with evidence or argument shift to the
applicant.” In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir.
1993) (citations omitted). We find that the examiner has met that burden, and
the rejection is affirmed. Moreover, as we find that the Fahim reference alone
renders the invention of claim 11 unpatentable, we further focus our analysis on
that reference.
Claim 11 is drawn to:
A method of recovering cellular functions following injury in an individual in
need of treatment, comprising the steps of:
administering a therapeutically effective amount of ascorbic acid or a salt
of ascorbic acid to said individual,
wherein said cellular functions are selected from the group consisting of
proliferation, mitochondrial function, Na+-K+-ATPase protein expression, Na+-K+-
ATPase protein activity, and active Na+ transport.
Fahim teaches a composition for promoting epithelial regeneration, i.e.,
proliferation,2 see id. at Col. 1, lines 11-13, wherein the composition comprises a
mixture of vitamin C (ascorbic acid), zinc and sulfur amino acid, see id. at Col. 1,
2 Note that claim 1 of Fahim is drawn to “A medication for treating epithelial tissue comprising
vitamin C, a zinc salt and a sulfur amino acid in an amount sufficient to stimulate cell proliferation
and new cell formation.”
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007