Appeal No. 2006-1608 Page 2
Application No. 09/978,593
Claims 20, 22, 31 and 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, on the grounds that the specification fails to provide an enabling
disclosure. In addition, claims 20 and 31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as being anticipated by El-Said1 as evidenced by Merck.2 After careful
review of the record and consideration of the issues before us, we reverse both
rejections.
DISCUSSION
Claims 20, 22, 31 and 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, “because the specification, while being enabling for inhibiting HIV viral
replication in Vero cells and Molt4 clone 8 cells with an extract of O. gratissimum,
does not reasonably provide enablement for the O. gratissimum extract to inhibit
HIV viral replication in a mammal or any other cell line. The specification does
not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is
most nearly connected, to practice the invention commensurate in scope with
these claims.” Examiner’s Answer, page 3.
1 El-Said et al. (El-Said), “An investigation into the efficacy of Ocimum gratissimum as used in
Nigerian native medicine,” Planta Medicine, pages 195-200 (1969).
2 Merck Manual (Merck), Beers et al., editors, published by Merck Research Laboratories,
Whitehouse Station, NJ, pp. 1293-1296, 1303-1306, 1312-1323, 2320-2324 and 2341-2343
(1999).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007