Ex parte ARUFFO et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 94-1696                                                          
          Application 07/811,129                                                      


          de Fougerolles et al. (de Fougerolles), “Characterization of                
          ICAM-2 and Evidence for a Third Counter-Receptor for LFA-1," J.             
          Exp. Med., vol. 174, pp. 253-267 (1991).                                    
          Dustin et al. (Dustin), “Induction by IL 1 and Interferon-(:                
          Tissue Distribution, Biochemistry, and Function of a Natural                
          Adherence Molecule (ICAM-1),” The Journal of Immunology, vol.               
          137, pp. 245-254 (1986).                                                    
          Makgoba et al. (Makgoba), “ICAM-1 a Ligand for LFA-1-Dependent              
          Adhesion of B, T and Myeloid Cells,” Nature, vol. 331, pp. 86-88            
          (1988).                                                                     
          Nortamo et al. (Nortamo), “A Monoclonal Antibody to the Human               
          Leukocyte Adhesion Molecule Intercellular Adhesion Molecule-2,”             
          The Journal of Immunology, vol. 146, pp. 2530-2535 (1991).                  
               Claims 1 through 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as            
          being unpatentable over Springer in view of Zettlmeissl.                    
               Having carefully considered the entire record which                    
          includes, inter alia, the specification, the appellants’ main               
          Brief (Paper No. 12) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 15), the                    
          examiner’s Answer (Paper No. 13) and Supplemental Answer (Paper             
          No. 16), we find ourselves in substantial agreement with the                
          appellants’ position.  Accordingly, we reverse the rejection.               
          Our reasons follow.                                                         


                                     Background                                       
               The appellants’ invention is directed to soluble fusion                
          proteins which comprise a first region capable of binding to the            

                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007