Appeal No. 1998-1719
Application No. 08/442,603
The references relied upon by the examiner are:
Clark et al. (Clark) 4,675,285 Jun. 23, 1987
Levinson et al. (Levinson) 4,713,339 Dec. 15, 1987
Martin et al. (Martin), “Glycosylation and Processing of High Levels of Active Human
Glucocerebrosidase in Invertebrate Cells Using a Baculovirus Expression Vector,”
DNA, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 99-106 (1988)
GROUND OF REJECTION
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Martin in view of
Levinson and Clark.
We reverse.
THE REJECTION UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103:
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration
to the appellants’ specification and claims, and to the respective positions
articulated by the appellants and the examiner. We make reference to the
examiner’s Answer2 for the examiner’s reasoning in support of the rejection. We
further reference appellants’ Brief3 for the appellants’ arguments in favor of
patentability.
The initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness rests on
the examiner. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed.
Cir. 1992).
2 Paper No. 18, mailed December 11, 1996.
3 Paper No. 16, received August 19, 1996.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007