Appeal No. 1997-2510
Application No. 07/868,539
We recognize appellant’s argument (Brief, page 14) that “Vickers suggest
[page 3368, first column, last sentence] that the oligonucleotide target, or TAR
element, acts as a translational rather than a transcriptional factor.” We note
however, that the claims merely require that the DNA “sequence corresponds to
a sequence of DNA recognized by a viral-specific transcription factor.” As
explained by the examiner, see supra, Vickers teach (figure 3, and Table 1)
“antisense oligonucleotides directed against the HIV TAR element.” While we
agree with appellant that Vickers suggests that TAR may act as a translational
repressor, Vickers teaches (bridging paragraph, page 3367, column 2 – page
3378, column 1) “tat functions at the level of transcription by binding TAR….”
Thus, Vickers teaches an antisense oligonucleotide complimentary to the HIV
TAR element which is recognized by the viral-specific transcription factor, tat.
However, we further note, that according to the claimed invention (see
e.g., claims 1 and 6), the DNA fragment has a first region having 6-30 bases
whose sequence corresponds to a sequence of DNA recognized by a viral-
specific transcription factor, and a second region having a sequence of
nucleotides that is complementary to said first region when the two sequences
are positioned in an anti-parallel configuration. While Vickers teaches a DNA
sequence that corresponds to a sequence of DNA recognized by a viral-specific
transcription factor, Vickers fails to teach a DNA fragment whose first 6-30 base
18
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007