Appeal No. 2007-0307
Application No. 09733,640
of Bateman may be used for controlled release in an organism only by introduction
into the digestive track, where it will come into contact with acids, enzymes and
bacteria." Id.
Due to the differences in between solid tablets administered to the digestive
track and the implantable compositions of Shukla exposed to an entirely different
milieu, we do not find that the examiner has provided sufficient motivation to
combine Shukla and Bateman to establish a prima facie case of obviousness. This
rejection is reversed.
CONCLUSION
The rejection of claims 1, 5-7, 17-18, 34, 38, 51-53, 55-56, 58, 60, and 66-67
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Lundgren is affirmed. The rejection of claims 1, 3,
5-7, 17-18, 34, 38, 49, 51-53, 55-56, and 58-72 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(b) over
Shukla in view of Lundgren is affirmed. The rejection of claims 1, 3-19, 34, 38,
and 49-72 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(b) over Brodbeck in view of Lundgren is
affirmed. The rejection of claims 3-4, 8, 19, 49-50, 54, 57, 59, 61-65, and 68-72
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(b) over Lundgren in view of Brodbeck is affirmed. The
rejection of claims 1, 3, 5, 34, 38, 51, and 58-72 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(b) over
Shukla in view of Bateman is reversed.
- 10 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013