Ex Parte YOSHII et al - Page 3


                 Appeal No.  2001-1907                                                        Page 3                    
                 Application No.  08/694,315                                                                            

                 Wood et al. (Wood), ”Proteins in Solution and Enzyme Mechanisms,”                                      
                 Biochemistry A Problems Approach, 2nd edition, pp. 126-172 (1981)                                      
                 Takashi et al. (Takashi), ”Basic studies on nebulizer therapy with histaglobin,                        
                 Systemic effects and histological findings of nasal and tracheal mucosa in                             
                 guinea pigs exposed to histamine-added guinea pig gamma-globulin,” Chemical                            
                 Abstracts, Vol. 112, p. 50, Abstracts No. 112:111828b (1990)                                           
                 Fahey et al. (Fahey), ”Immune-based therapies in HIV infection,” Clin. Exp.                            
                 Immunol., Vol. 89, pp. 3-5 (1992)                                                                      
                 Buckley, “Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases,” Fundamental Immunology, 3rd                              
                 Edition, Chp. 38, pp. 1354-1368 (1993)                                                                 
                 Yoshii, (Yosshii II), “Arerugi,” Japanese Journal of Allergology, Vol. 44, Issue 5,                    
                 pp. 567-570 (1995)                                                                                     
                 Naiki et al. (Naiki), ”Rat g-Globulin/Histamine inhibits Experimental Allergic                         
                 Encephaomyelitis (EAE) in Lewis Rats,” Cong. Immun., 9th Inter., Abstract 1084                         
                 (1995)                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                       
                        Claims 23, 26 and 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first                                
                 paragraph, on the grounds that the specification does not enable any person                            
                 skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to                 
                 make and use the invention commensurate in scope with the claims.  Claims 1-2,                         
                 5-16, 18-23 and 25-27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being                                 
                 rendered obvious by the combination of Yoshii I, Yoshii II, Naiki, Getlik, Takashi,                    
                 McMichael and Wood.  In addition, claims 23, 26 and 27 stand rejected under                            
                 the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting over the                          
                 combination of claims 1-11 of U.S. Patent No. 5,780,026, McMichael and Wood.                           
                 After careful review of the record and consideration of the issues before us, we                       
                 reverse all of the rejections of record.                                                               







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007