And I understand from Counsel that the references themselves need not provide a specific teaching or suggestion of the alteration needed to arrive at the Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,517,219 Declaration of Elaine S. Gilmore, M.D., Ph.D. (Exhibit 1018) claimed invention; the analysis may include recourse to logic, judgment, and common sense available to a person of ordinary skill that does not necessarily require an explicit teaching, suggestion, or motivation in any reference.
without a certification in dermatology (i.e., a primary care physician, or a pediatrician) may qualify as a clinical POSA, assuming that they have more than two years of knowledge and experience treating skin conditions.
I have been informed by Counsel that the proper construction of the claims in this proceeding Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 9,517,219 Declaration of Elaine S. Gilmore, M.D., Ph.D. (Exhibit 1018) is the “broadest reasonable interpretation” in light of the patent’s specification.
(AMN1004, 1) A POSA in 2012 would understand that Garrett teaches methods of treating both rosacea and acne consisting of inflammatory and non-inflammatory lesions by applying topical compositions containing dapsone to a patient’s affected areas.
First, the reduction in number of daily applications is not unexpected, as dermatologists expected at the time of invention that the potency, or strength, of a given drug is related to both its duration of action and its side effects.