Appeal No. 2007-0055 Page 15
Application No. 10/053,299
find no explanation in the record of how concentration (e.g., micrograms/ml) relates to
quantity per square centimeter of cell surface area as recited in claims 2-4. There is no
information in the record before us of how to convert solution concentration as
described in Zeng to the surface area units which are recited claims 2-4. Consequently,
we are unable to determine whether Zeng’s concentration of isoleucine overlaps with
the quantity of isoleucine recited in the instant claims. In sum, there is insufficient
evidence of record to sustain this rejection. We reverse the rejection of claims 2, 3, and
4.
Claims 11-13 and 25
Claim 11 recites a composition comprising “from about 0.001 to about 99% by
weight of an amino acid component” which is isoleucine or an active isoleucine analog,
component B), and optionally component C).
In regard to the amounts present in claim 11, Appellants argue that “[w]hether or
not any isoleucine remains in the vagina after such neutralization is unknown and
amounts to unfounded speculation.” Brief, page 27. We do not find this argument
persuasive because the claim is to a composition, and does not require that isoleucine
endure in the vagina for any length of time. As discussed supra., p. 13 at fn.4, Zeng
teaches a composition comprising 0.393% by weight of isoleucine. This amount falls
with the scope of claims 11, 12, and 13. Accordingly, we affirm the rejection of these
claims. Claim 25 falls with claims 11-13 because it was not separately argued.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013