Ex Parte Petersen et al - Page 40


             Appeal No. 2006-2627                                                            Page 40                
             Application No. 09/947,833                                                                             

             O’Leary recognizes the problem noted by Wironen when glycerol is used as the carrier.                  
             See O’Leary, column 3, line 63 – column 4, line 7, emphasis added,                                     
                    where [for example] the carrier component is glycerol and separation of                         
                    bone powder occurs to an excessive extent where a particular application                        
                    is concerned, a thickener such as . . . hydroxypropyl methylcellulose . . .                     
                    can be combined with the carrier in an amount sufficient to significantly                       
                    improve the suspension-keeping characteristics of the composition.                              
             Therefore, as I understand O’Leary, when the solution is such that the demineralized                   
             bone cannot be properly sequestered for a particular surgical application, a thickening                
             agent (or protein-sequestering agent) should be included in the composition.  One such                 
             thickening agent, or protein-sequestering agent, taught by O’Leary is hydroxypropyl                    
             methylcellulose.  Apparently recognizing the same problem with their composition, Yim                  
             teaches the use of hydroxypropyl methylcellulose, as well as calcium sulfate, as a                     
             protein-sequestering agent.  Yim, column 7, lines 26-37, 50-54 and column 8,                           
             lines 25-30.  Based on the foregoing analysis, it would appear that the combination of                 
             O’Leary and Yim, would overcome the disadvantage Wironen attributes to the O’Leary                     
             composition.  Accordingly, I am not persuaded by appellants’ argument.                                 
                    On reflection, it is my opinion that the evidence of record supports the examiner’s             
             conclusion that a bone repair composition comprising calcium sulfate; demineralized                    
             bone matrix; cancellous bone; hydroxypropyl methylcellulose; and a mixing solution in                  
             the amounts set forth in appellants’ claimed invention would have been prima facie                     
             obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made.  As               
             discussed above, appellants’ arguments to the contrary are insufficient to rebut this                  
             prima facie case of obviousness.  Accordingly, I would affirm the rejection of claim 1                 







Page:  Previous  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007