Appeals 2006-1443 and 2006-1465
Reexamination Control Nos. 90/004,950 and 90/005,200
1 Dr. Wuest starts his analysis by noting that “There Are Other Potential Routes for
2 Making the Final Product of Claim 1 Of the ‘216 Patent”. Wuest declaration, Ex. 1001,
3 page 22.
4 We take Dr. Wuest’s testimony to be that, as of the date he signed his declaration
5 in 1999, one skilled in the art would have understood that there “are various possible
6 alternative pathways for making the cephem compound of claim 1 of the ‘216 patent.”
7 Wuest declaration, Ex. 1001, Paragraph 50.
8 The Morin document contains numerous pages and is an example of a large
9 document submitted by Appellants where only a few pages are mentioned in the Wuest
10 declaration. Consistent with our previous observation, we have considered only the
11 pages mentioned.
12 With reference to page 21 of Morin et al., Chemistry and Biology of β-Lactam
13 Antibiotics (1982) (Ex. 1010), we think that Dr. Wuest is trying to tell us that compounds
14 similar to the starting materials in the process of Ochiai ‘216 claim 1 are shown as
15 Compounds 65 and 66.
16 According to Dr. Wuest, a displacement reaction is said to be shown on page 87
17 of Morin. Wuest declaration, Ex. 1001, page 23 and Ex. 1010, page 87.
18 Dr. Wuest goes on to testify that “[a]lthough the Morin reference does not
19 specifically disclose coupling of an amino-substitute thiazolyl compound to penicillin
20 sulfoxide, given the examples taught in the Ochiai specification, I would expect that this
21 reaction could be carried out.” Wuest declaration, Ex. 1001, page 23.
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007