Appeal No. 2007-1140
Application No. 10/753,729
Cuthbertson et al. (Cuthbertson) PCT WO 01/77145 A2 Oct. 18,
2001Co-pending U.S. App. Ser. No. 10/269, 575 (“the ‘575 Application”)
Claims 1-11, 13-18, 20, and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as obvious over Cuthbertson (Answer 4). Claims 1-11, 13-18, 20, and 22
stand provisionally rejected under the judicially-created doctrine of obvious-
type double patent as unpatentable over claims 1-22 of the co-pending ‘575
Application (Answer 7). The claims stand or fall together in each rejection
because Appellants did not argue separately argue the patentability of the
claims. For the purpose of deciding this appeal, we chose claim 1 as
representative. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii). Claim 1 reads as follows:
1. A compound of general formula (I)
or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof wherein
G represents glycine
D represents aspartic acid
R1 represents -(CH2)n,- or -(CH2)n-C6H4- wherein
n represents a positive integer 1 to 10
h represents a positive integer 1 or 2
X1 represents an amino acid residue wherein said amino acid
possesses a functional side-chain such as an acid or amine.
X2 and X4 represent independently an amino acid residue capable of
forming a disulphide bond,
X3 represents arginine, N-methylarginine or an arginine mimetic,
X5 represents a hydrophobic amino acid or derivatives thereof, and
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013