Ex Parte COOK et al - Page 6



            Appeal No. 2002-0798                                                          Page 6              
            Application No. 09/107,688                                                                        

                   and fail to describe reagents or other means to achieve these asserted                     
                   conclusory steps.                                                                          
                   Additionally, the claims omit essential structures (including the                          
                   structure of the reactants and final product) and the necessary structural                 
                   cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap                    
                   between the necessary structural connections.  See MPEP § 2172.01.                         
            Id., page 5, lines 8-16.  Again, the examiner characterizes applicants' claims as drawn           
            to methods for making combinatorial libraries "without metes and bounds as to the final           
            chemical structure" (Id., page 7, line 18).  This suggestion that the appealed claims lack        
            sufficient clarity and definiteness to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112,           
            second paragraph, is anomalous in the context of a rejection under  35 U.S.C. § 112,              
            first paragraph, particularly because the examiner has expressly withdrawn a rejection            
            of claims 13, 29, and 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as indefinite (Id.,             
            page 3, lines 8 and 9).                                                                           
                   Likewise, the examiner argues that                                                         
                   the claimed combinatorial libraries [prepared by the claimed methods]                      
                   comprise compounds that are merely drug candidates.  Any benefit to the                    
                   public (to one of ordinary skill in the art) is speculative.  There is no basis            
                   in the specification upon which to conclude that any of the compounds                      
                   (besides those specifically tested) encompassed by the library are, or will                
                   turn out to be, biologically active after testing.                                         
                   Thus, the biomedical research contemplated by applicants is to take                        
                   place at some future time, only when the properties of the claimed                         
                   compounds have been elucidated by the experimental methods                                 
                   (screening assays) to which the specification alludes.                                     
                   Absent a disclosure of those properties, the asserted utility of                           
                   biomedical research lacks specificity.  Note, because the claimed                          
                   invention is not supported by a specific asserted utility for the reasons just             
                   set forth, credibility cannot be assessed.                                                 







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

Last modified: November 3, 2007