Appeal 2007-0318
Application 09/766,362
the dry powder form comprising microparticles having an average
particle size of between 10 and 20 microns and comprising the
drug and diketopiperazines.
7. A drug delivery device for nasal administration comprising a drug
in a dry powder form . . . , and a device for delivering a measured
dose of the drug to the nasal mucosa, wherein the dry powder form
comprises [the composition of claim 1].
14. A method for administering a drug to the nasal region of a patient
in need thereof, comprising nasally administering a dry powder . .
. , wherein the dry powder comprises [the composition of claim 1.]
3. The composition of claim 2 [wherein the drug is selected from the
group consisting of antihistamine, vasoconstrictors,
antiinflammatories and analgesics] wherein the antihistamine is
selected from the group consisting of chlorpheniramine and
azelastine.
20. The composition of claim 1 formed by spray drying.
The Examiner relies upon the following references to support his two
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejections:
Steiner U.S. 5,503,852 Apr. 2, 1996
Illum U.S. 5,690,954 Nov. 25, 1997
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17 and 18 are rejected over Steiner;
and claims 3, 8, 10, 16, 20, and 21 are rejected over Steiner and Illum.
OBVIOUSNESS UNDER § 103(a)
THE REJECTIONS BASED ON STEINER
Claims 1 and 14
Claim 1 recites a composition, and claim 14 recites the administration
of the compound. With respect to claim 1, Appellants contend:
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013