NO, it is NOT preferable. 'Characterized in that' would be 'dadurch gekennzeichnet, dass'. If it doesn't say that, it doesn't get translated as that.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 13 hrs 52 mins (2006-01-18 14:53:20 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Here are just a few of thousands of examples of this usage (I have chosen strictly references based on US patents from US patentees/applicants, i.e. *not translations*):

Agent: Pfizer Inc - New York, NY, US
Inventor: John Adams Lowe
Class: 514269000 (USPTO), A61K031/513 (Intl Class)

1. A compound of the formula: 4wherein Z.sub.1 and Z.sub.2 are independently carbon or nitrogen, provided that Z.sub.2 is not carbon when Z.sub.1 is carbon; W, X and Y are each, independently, hydrogen, (C.sub.1-C.sub.6) alkyl optionally substituted with from one to seven fluorine atoms, (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)alkoxy optionally substituted with from one to seven fluorine atoms, with the proviso that the number of fluorine substituents on each of the (C.sub.1-C.sub.6) alkyl and (C.sub.1-C.sub.6) alkoxy groups does not exceed the number of positions in each of the (C.sub.1-C.sub.6) alkyl and (C.sub.1-C.sub.6) alkoxy groups that are available for substitution; carboxy; carbo-(C.sub.1-C.sub.6)alkoxy; carboxamido; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)alkyl-thio; sulfoxyl; sulfonyl; halo; nitro; cyano; amino; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6) alkylamino and di[(C.sub.1-C.sub.6) alkyl]amino; and R.sub.1 is hydrogen or C.sub.1-C.sub.6 alkyl; or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof.

2. A compound according to claim 1, wherein Z.sub.1 is N and Z.sub.2 is CH.

http://www.freshpatents.com/Pyridylamino-compounds-and-metho...



3. A compound having the following formula:

EMI4.0

Wherein at least one of R1, R2 R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, and R9 contains COOH or other acidic groups.

4. The compound of claim 3, wherein X can be C or N; when C or N is at any X position, the corresponding R group may or may not be there.

http://v3.espacenet.com/textclam?CY=gb&LG=en&DB=EPODOC&IDX=U...

This invention relates to methods of treating patients with cancer by administering combination chemotherapy wherein effective amounts and schedules of administration of two or more antineoplastic agents are administered to the patient, together with a toxicity reducing amount of a protective agent of the following formula I:

R1 --S--X1 --R2.sub.; (I)

wherein R1 is hydrogen, C1 -C6 alkyl, or --S--X2 --R3 ;

R2 and R3 are each individually sulfonate or phosphonate; and

X1 and X2 are each individually C1 -C6 alkyl, optionally substituted by one or more hydroxy, sulfhydryl or alkoxy moieties.

http://www.pharmcast.com/Patents/Yr2003/July2003/072203/6596...



John Henry, a research chemist at the C & O Chemical Co., makes new chemical compounds the old-fashioned way: one at a time, thoroughly isolating, identifying and testing each new compound.[2] He discovers a new anti-viral compound that cures both AIDS and the West Nile virus and subsequently applies for a patent. His application is rejected by the Patent Office as being anticipated by[3] and obvious over[4] a patent assigned to the Steam Drill Chemical Co. The Steam Drill patent has three broad claims:



1. A library[5] comprising a plurality of compounds of Formula I:

XYZ;

wherein X is a scaffold[6] and Y and Z are Markush[7] groups comprising hundreds of substituents.

2. A compound[8] of the Formula I:

XYZ;

wherein X is a scaffold and Y and Z are Markush groups comprising hundreds of substituents.

3. A method of making the library or compounds of claims 1 or 2 comprising the step of converting scaffold X to a further functionalized compound XYZ.[9]

http://www.jmls.edu/ripl/vol2/issue1/hopkins-middle.html


"in which" would be another viable option. "where" is not strictly wrong, but it is not common in such contexts, for which I'm sure the patent attorneys have very good reasons.