Appeal No. 94-3056
Application 07/812,421
activity, and the art provides both the
motivation and a reasonable expectation of
enhanced AFPs.
We do not agree that “adding additional repeat sequences”
is reasonably “suggested by Chakrabartty”, nor that
Chakrabartty and Scott “indicate that the number of ice
contact points is the limiting factor in antifreeze activity.”
The examiner argues that Chakrabartty teaches length variation
in the right hand column of page 11315. See page 11 of the
Final Rejection and page 8 of the Appeal Brief. We find that
Chakrabartty there refers to “analogs which vary in length” in
the context of “repeating the experiment”. Chakrabartty’s
work involves analogs of 1 repeat, 2 repeats and 3 repeats.
See Table 1 of Chakrabartty on page 11314. The reference does
not teach lengthening the polypeptide by adding more than
three repeats. The polypeptides of claims 32-37 contain six
or eight specified 11-amino acid sequence “repeats”.
Polypeptides of this length with this number of repeats are
neither taught by nor reasonably suggested by the teachings of
Chakrabartty. Nor is a finding that the limiting factor in
antifreeze activity is the “number of ice contact points”
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007