Ex parte PETER N. KAO, RONALD G. PEARL,
TOSHIHIKO NISHIMURA, and JOHN L. FAUL
Appeal 2008-5150
Application 10/801,729
Technology Center 1600
Decided: April 29, 2009
Claim at issue had the following phrase:
1. A method of treating a lung proliferative vascular disorder in a patient comprising administering an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor,
wherein the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor is present in an amount effective to reduce vascular occlusion in the pulmonary arteries of the
patient, and which does not substantially increase endothelial cell nitric oxide synthase activity in the endothelial cells of the pulmonary arteries of
the patient; and wherein said lung proliferative vascular disorder is selected from the group consisting of primary pulmonary hypertension, secondary pulmonary
hypertension, Eisenmenger’s syndrome, chronic thromboembolic disease, pulmonary fibrosis, obliterative bronchiolitis, and lymphangioleiomyomatosis.
The Examiner alleged that the underlined phrase was indefinite because “the meaning of the claims should be clear from the wording of the claim[s] alone” The Board rejected this argument and found that the specification clearly defined the term for one of skill in the art. The term was specifically defined in the specification. Because of the definition the indefiniteness rejection was reversed. The claims were found to be anticipated and obvious for other reasons.
Full opinion can be found here.
Posts
