Appeal No. 1996-0848
Application 07/624,053
The abstract does not teach how one would successfully carry
out the Percoll gradient fractionation of T-cells so as to identify
a fraction containing a subset of T-cells which produces MCF
material.
This limited disclosure in Jones is contrasted with the specification which reasonably
appears to provide detailed instructions at pages 23-34 as to how the cells lines are
generated and provides specific information as to identifying and isolating those which
produce MCF.
In addition, Dr. Jones indicates that the abstract erroneously indicates that the
factor can be precipitated from the supernatant with 30-50% ammonium sulfate, which was
subsequently found to result in the loss of virtually all of the associated biological activity
which "would make it impossible to detect activity in any subsequent isolation steps and/or
to obtain a final product with sufficient biological activity to be of use pharmacologically."
(Exhibit H, Declaration, page 6). The examiner does not dispute this point. Yet, if
appellant is correct that use of the precipitation step described by Jones would eliminate
the very biological activity sought, then the reference cannot reasonably be considered to
place that aspect of the invention in the hands of the public.
We agree with appellant that before a prior art disclosure can preclude an applicant
from obtaining a patent, that prior art disclosure must contain an enabling disclosure. In re
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007