1. Relevant extract of EPO Examination Report

EPO Patent Examiner(s) took cognizance of TKDL references. Extract of examination report are reproduced below:

“Documents Considered To Be Relevant

D1 N.N.: “MH1/3221 Tila Bara-e Khaarish-e- Zihaar Wa Khusiya”,
     TKDL
     , 1 January 1812 (1812-01-01),
     Retrieved from the Internet:
URL:
http://www.tkdl.res.in/tkdl/LangDefault/Formulation/Member_Docs/BC/unani/highlight.asp?a=/tkdl/Langdefault/Formulation/Member_Docs/BC/Unani/MH1-3221.asp&b=acacia+and+pruritus?str=Global
(retrieved on 2012-02-03)

D2 N.N.: “NA4/1810 Dawa Barai Gajcaraan”,
     TKDL
     , 1 January 1912 (1912-01-01),
     Retrieved from the Internet:
URL:
http://www.tkdl.res.in/tkdl/LangDefault/Formulation/Member_Docs/BC/unani/highlight.asp?a=/tkdl/Langdefault/Formulation/Member_Docs/BC/Unani/ NA4/1810.asp&b=acacia+and+pruritus?str=Global (retrieved on 2012-02-03)

Art. 54

The present application does not meet the requirements of Article 52 (1) EPC, because the subject-matter of claims 1, 4-9, 11 and 12 is not new in the sense of Article 54 (1) and (2) EPC.
D1 discloses the use of a composition containing Acacia Arabica/nillotica for the treatment of pruritus.
The subject-matter of claims 1, 4-9, 11 and 12 is therefore not new ( Article 54(1) and (2) EPC).
D2 discloses the use of a composition containing Acacia leucophloea for the treatment of pruritus.
The subject-matter of claims 1, 4-9, 11 and 12 is therefore not new ( Article 54(1) and (2) EPC).

Art. 56

The present application does not meet the requirements of Article 52(1) EPC, since the subject-matter of claims 2, 3, 10, 13 and 14 does not involve an inventive step in the sense of Article 56 EPC.
D1 discloses the use of a composition containing Acacia Arabica/nillotica for the treatment of pruritus, from which the subject-matter of the remaining claims differs in that other Acacia species are claimed.
Being aware of the teaching of D1 the skilled person performed an arbitrary choice out of the list of active ingredients to select.
Since there is no surprising effect resulting from that choice, the solution proposed in claims 2, 3, 10, 13 and 14 of the present application is not considered to be inventive in the sense of Article 56 EPC.”

Full examination report can be referred at EP2052731.pdf

2. Outcomes of Examination Report.

As the outcome of TKDL references and other documents cited in examination report, Examination of the application is under progress and reply from the Applicant M/s Mimozax Co., Ltd. / Japan is still awaited.