Appeal No. 95-4464
Application 07/605,788
para. 1.
The examiner argues that
[i]t would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of the invention to culture
human olfactory epithelial neurons using Coon’s method of
culturing olfactory epithelial neurons obtained from rats
because Talamo suggests that neurons in the olfactory
epithelium are good candidates for development of cell
culture of cell lines for studying Alzheimer’s disease and
Coon teaches a method of establishing continuous cultures of
the neuronal stem cells using olfactory epithelial tissue.
Thus one would have reasonably expected to successfully
culture neuron-containing olfactory epithelium from humans
using Coon’s method which has been show [sic, shown] to
allow for continuously [sic, continuous] culture [of] the
same cells isolated from another vertebrate species. It
would have been obvious to detect AD-specific changes as
taught by Talamo et al in the cultured cells because Talamo
teaches that olfactory epithelium from patients with
Alzheimer’s disease exhibits differential binding as
compared to normal olfactory tissue using antibody ALZ50
which Wolozin teaches is specific for AD. One would have
been motivated to add an ionophore as taught by Cole et al
to cultured cells as a means of increasing calcium-mediated
expression of APP as an AD marker because Cole teaches that
ionomycin causes release of C-terminal APP in membrane
fragments [Answer, p. 6].
In response, the appellants focus their arguments primarily
on whether the combined teachings of Talamo and Coon would have
suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art, the culturing of
human AD olfactory neurons and whether said person would have had
a reasonable expectation of success of culturing human olfactory
neurons using the disclosed rat medium. In re O’Farrell, 853
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007