Interference No. 102,572
expression...”; and submitted the proposal to Genentech on October 5, 1981 (citing CX-2
and Bates page 922). While Riggs’, in his testimony identifies CX-2 as a proposal he
formulated and forwarded to Genentech on October 5, 1981, his testimony is insufficient
to establish a complete conception since he does not explain what specific passage(s) of
Bates page 922 support his conclusory statement or how any part of Bates page 922
“contains all the elements of Count 1" as alleged in their brief. (CB-24, first paragraph)
Amoss, 195 USPQ at 453-454. Exhibits do not speak for themselves. We find no
explanation as to how the statement “a single bacterial strain could be constructed which
contained both heavy and light chain genes for co-expression” satisfies the terms of the
count and shows that every limitation of the count was known by the inventor at the time of
the alleged conception. Coleman, 754 F.2d at 359, 224 USPQ at 862. Each express
limitation of the count is considered material and cannot be disregarded. Schur v. Muller,
372 F.2d 546, 551, 152 USPQ 605, 609 (CCPA 1967). The count requires employing a
first and second DNA sequence encoding for at least the variable regions of the heavy and
light chain of an Ig molecule. In addition, the process requires the production of specific
product. There is no evidence in this record that establishes that the inventors were in
possession of the DNA encoding for the heavy and light chains of the IgG antibody
produced by CEA.66-E3 cell line or any other antibody and the means for producing an
active antibody product. Hence, the idea is not so clearly defined in the inventor's mind
that only ordinary skill would be necessary to reduce the invention to practice, without
49
Page: Previous 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007