The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte WILLIAM H. FREY II and ROBERT GARY THORNE
__________
Appeal 2007-0542
Application 10/302,185
Technology Center 1600
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before SCHEINER, GREEN, and LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent
Judges.
LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
STATEMENT OF CASE
The claims in this appeal are drawn to a method of delivering nerve
growth factor (NGF) or fibroblast growth factor (FGF) to the central nervous
system through transdermal administration at a skin region innervated by the
trigeminal nerve, but outside the nasal cavity. Claims 45-48, 50, 52, and 53,
all the pending claims in the case, are on appeal. Br. 1. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 134.
There are two prior art rejections on appeal: 1) Claims 45-48, 50, 52,
and 53 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Frey in view
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013