Appeal No. 93-2460
Application No. 07/590,647
We initially note the appellants’ statement that the claims
stand or fall together. Brief, p. 3; 37 CFR § 1.192(c)5)(1993);
now 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7). Accordingly, we will limit our
consideration of the issues raised in this appeal as they apply
to claims 1, 4, 11, 22 and 46, which are representative of each
ground of rejection. Claims 1 through 48 are attached as an
appendix to this decision.
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Fillatti et al. (Fillatti), “Efficient Transfer of a Glyphosate
Tolerance Gene into Tomato Using a Binary Agrobacterium
Tumefaciens Vector,” Bio/Technology, Vol. 5, pp. 726-730, (1987).
Fitzgibbon, “Pseudomonas SP. Strain PG2982: Uptake of Glyphosate
and Cloning of a Gene Which Confers Increased Resistance to
Glyphosate,” University Microfilms International, pp. viii-ix,
18, 22-29, 32, 93 and 96-108, (1988).
Comai 4,769,061 Sep. 6, 1988
Potrykus, “Gene Transfer To Cereals: An Assessment,”
Bio/Technology, Vol. 8, pp. 535-542 (1990).
DeGreve et al. (DeGreve) EPA 0 193 259 Sep. 3, 1986
The claims stand rejected as follows:2
2The Answer contains five additional rejections of the
claims under the judicially-created doctrine of obviousness-type
double patenting and 35 U.S.C. § 103. However, these rejection
were withdrawn by the examiner in the Supplemental Answer (Paper
No. 16).
22
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007