The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte KEVIN P. BAKER,
JIAN CHEN, LUC DESNOYERS,
AUDREY GODDARD, PAUL J. GODOWSKI,
AUSTIN L. GURNEY, JAMES PAN,
VICTORIA SMITH, COLIN K. WATANABE,
WILLIAM I. WOOD, and ZEMIN ZHANG
__________
Appeal 2007-0057
Application 10/174,586
Technology Center 1600
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before SCHEINER, ADAMS, and GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judges.
GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 involving claims to a
polypeptide. The Examiner has rejected the claims as lacking patentable
utility, lacking adequate written description, and anticipated. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We affirm the rejections for lack of
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013