Appeal No. 1996-0657
Application 07/919,784
Representative Claims
Claims 5 and 8, which are illustrative of the subject matter on appeal, read
as follows:
5. A biologically pure chitin-containing-fungus-inhibiting composition
containing (a) endochitinase which is coded for by a gene in the genome of a
fungus and (b) protein which causes release of chromogenic p-nitrophenol from p-
nitrophenyl-ß-D-N,N'-diacetylchitobiose but not from p-nitrophenyl-N-acetyl-ß -D-
glucosaminide and which is coded for by a gene in the genome of a fungus, in a
weight ratio of (a):(b) ranging from 3:1 to 1:1.2.
8. A method of inhibiting the germination or replication of a chitin-containing
fungus of a genus selected from the group consisting of Botrytis, Fusarium,
Saccharomyces, Trichoderma, Uncinula, and Ustilago, which comprises contacting
such fungus with an antifungal effective amount of the composition of claim 5.
The References
There appears to be some confusion on this record respecting what
references the examiner relies on in rejecting appellants’ claims. In the Examiner’s
Answer mailed September 27, 1995 (Paper No. 30), Section (7) the examiner lists
the following “prior art of record relied upon in the rejection of claims under appeal:”
A. Ôtakara (Ôtakara (I)), “Studies on the Chitinolytic Enzymes of Black-koji Mold,”
Agric. Biol. Chem., Vol. 27, No. 6, pp. 454-460 (1963)
A. Ohtakara et al. , “Isolation of Chitinase and Chitobiase Produced by Pycnoporus
cinnabarinus and Their Properties,” Chemical Abstracts, Vol. 95:348, Abstract No.
75979W, August 1981
M. Yabuki, “Chitinase and a Method for Its Production,” Derwent Biotechnol.
Abstracts, Vol. 4, No. 15, Abstract No. 85-07729 (July 1985)
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007