Appeal No. 2006-2892
Application No. 10/012,237
. . . The fact that an antibody binds to other proteins with a given
epitope does not make it non-specific for that protein. The antibody is
still specific, but for a given epitope. [Answer at 3-4.]
Analysis
We agree with Appellants that specific binding is dependent upon the presence of
a particular epitope. However, we also agree with the Examiner that at least some
antibodies would be expected to specifically bind to both SEQ ID NO:227 and Lal’s SEQ
ID NO:24 as both likely have such an epitope in common, given the very large overlap of
430 amino acids (substantially 100% of Lal’s sequence is found in that of Appellants).
Thus, unless some unidentified secondary or tertiary structure interfered with such
binding, any antibody that specifically binds to an epitope of SEQ ID NO:24 would likely
specifically bind to SEQ ID NO:227.
As Appellants argue, there may be antibodies that specifically bind to SEQ ID
NO:227 and not to SEQ ID NO:24. Br. 6; Reply 4 (“specific epitopes in the SEQ ID
NO:227 protein that are not found in the Lal protein clearly exist . . . in the amino
terminal half of SEQ ID NO:227”). However, that fact is not relevant to deciding this
case, in view of Appellants’ claim language. As we interpret the claims, they include all
antibodies that specifically bind to SEQ ID NO:227, including any that also specifically
bind to SEQ ID NO:24.4 And to the extent “specific epitopes . . . exist . . . in the amino
terminal half of SEQ ID NO:227,” its fair to conclude other specific epitopes exist in the
4 While not necessary for our determination, we interpret the term “antibody” to include
polyclonal antibodies, given the additional limitations in dependent claim 29 to
“monoclonal.” See also Specification at 373, l. 7 (“anti-PRO antibodies may . . . be
monoclonal antibodies”).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013