<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Potential Therapeutic Compounds Not Obvious Absent A Predictable Solution</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2008/07/24/potential-therapeutic-compounds-not-obvious-absent-a-predictable-solution/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2008/07/24/potential-therapeutic-compounds-not-obvious-absent-a-predictable-solution/</link>
	<description>Freshly Brewed Bio/Pharma Chat. Served Up Daily.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:54:35 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Recent URLs tagged Obvious - Urlrecorder</title>
		<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2008/07/24/potential-therapeutic-compounds-not-obvious-absent-a-predictable-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-65352</link>
		<dc:creator>Recent URLs tagged Obvious - Urlrecorder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:16:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2008/07/24/potential-therapeutic-compounds-not-obvious-absent-a-predictable-solution/#comment-65352</guid>
		<description>[...] recorded first by vakibs on 2009-01-08&#8594; Potential Therapeutic Compounds Not Obvious Absent A Predictable... [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] recorded first by vakibs on 2009-01-08&rarr; Potential Therapeutic Compounds Not Obvious Absent A Predictable&#8230; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MaxDrei</title>
		<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2008/07/24/potential-therapeutic-compounds-not-obvious-absent-a-predictable-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-58295</link>
		<dc:creator>MaxDrei</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:22:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2008/07/24/potential-therapeutic-compounds-not-obvious-absent-a-predictable-solution/#comment-58295</guid>
		<description>Stephen, for an ignorant European, can you offer a quck explanation of the &quot;lead compound&quot; concept. In this case, that means, I suppose, &quot;most promising springboard for finding a new and better anti-ulcer drug&quot;. But the claim in suit is to the molecule per se, not to the drug, so how can the concept of the &quot;lead compound&quot; be so purpose-narrow. If you want to defeat the obviousness attack with the argument &quot;lead compound not the obvious starting point&quot; don&#039;t you need &quot;anti-ulcer drug&quot; in the claim?  Or did Judge Rader read that technical feature into the claim, as an implicit feature?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stephen, for an ignorant European, can you offer a quck explanation of the &#8220;lead compound&#8221; concept. In this case, that means, I suppose, &#8220;most promising springboard for finding a new and better anti-ulcer drug&#8221;. But the claim in suit is to the molecule per se, not to the drug, so how can the concept of the &#8220;lead compound&#8221; be so purpose-narrow. If you want to defeat the obviousness attack with the argument &#8220;lead compound not the obvious starting point&#8221; don&#8217;t you need &#8220;anti-ulcer drug&#8221; in the claim?  Or did Judge Rader read that technical feature into the claim, as an implicit feature?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
