Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 53 Example 8 s Conclusion It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to substitute ofloxacin for ciprofloxacin in the treatment of otopathy with a predictable expectation of successful treatment due to the compounds’ structural and functional similarities 54 54 Daiichi Sankyo Co. v. Apotex, Inc., 501 F.3d 1254, 84 USPQ2d 1285 (Fed. Cir. 2007) s Court’s Analysis District Court erred in the determination of the level of skill By finding the level of skill in the prior art to be too high, prior art teaching was dismissed by the District Court 55 55 Highlights and Guidance s Resolving the level of ordinary skill may be explicit or implicit in view of the prior art applied When making an obviousness rejection, examiners are only required to make an explicit statement addressing the level of ordinary skill in the art when the level of ordinary skill is not clear in light of the cited prior art (Union Carbide Corp. v. American Can Co., 724 F.2d 1567, 1573 (Fed. Cir. 1984)) s 56 56 Example 9 s Claim The 5(S) stereoisomer of ramipril substantially free of other isomers 57 57 Example 9 s Prior Art References teach that related ACE­inhibiting therapeutic compounds (BPP5a, captopril, and enalapril) are m...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/05/2010 for the course LAW LAW6571 taught by Professor Abbott during the Spring '10 term at Florida State College.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online