Appeal 2007-2524
Application 10/194,834
15. Cagle refers to a prior art therapeutic composition comprising
ciprofloxacin for IV administration (Cagle, at col. 1, ll. 48-53).
DISCUSSION
Anticipation requires that every element and limitation of the claimed
invention must be found in a single prior art reference, arranged as in the
claim. Karsten Mfg. Corp. v. Cleveland Golf Co., 242 F.3d 1376, 1383, 58
USPQ2d 1286, 1291 (Fed. Cir. 2001). Specific examples, while helpful, are
not required to establish anticipation. See In re Petering, 301 F.2d 676, 133
USPQ 275 (CCPA 1962); In re Schaumann, 572 F.2d 312, 316, 197 USPQ
5, 9 (CCPA 1978); Sanofi-Synthelabo v. Apotex Inc., 470 F.3d 1368, 1377,
81 USPQ2d 1097, 1102-03 (Fed. Cir. 2006). Here, to establish anticipation,
it must be found that Cagle describes a composition comprising “a quinolone
component present . . . in an amount in a range of about 0.15%
weight/volume to about 1.1% weight/volume” and which is “free of any
other component effective as a preservative.”
Throughout Cagle, antibiotic compositions are described having
ciprofloxacin, or other quinolones, but no other ingredient, including no
preservatives (Cagle, at col. 2, ll. 63, at col. 3, l. 39, at col. 4, ll. 1-11, at col.
1, ll. 48-53, at col. 10, 11. 15-25; Findings of Fact (“FF) 1-6, 13-14).
Example 2 is a specific example of a composition comprising 0.03 wt %
ciprofloxacin (Cagle, at col. 8, ll. 18; FF 9), but which lacks BAC (FF 10) or
any other preservative. There is no mention in Cagle that a preservative is
necessary to achieve the compositions’s purpose in sterilizing and treating
post surgical infections (FF 7). Thus, Cagle explicitly describes
ciprofloxacin compositions without preservatives, meeting the limitation of
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013