Ex Parte VAN DEN BERG et al - Page 3




                Appeal No. 95-0083                                                                                                         
                Application 07/711,556                                                                                                     


                                region and a structural gene, whereby said DNA sequence is                                                 
                                expressed and said polypeptide is obtained.                                                                
                        The references relied on by the examiner are:                                                                      
                        Hitzeman et al. (Hitzeman)               4,775,622               Oct. 04, 1983                                     
                        Kurjan et al.  (Kurjan)                  4,546,082               Oct. 08, 1985                                     
                        Hollenberg et al. (Hollenberg)           4,859,596               Aug. 22, 1989                                     
                        Hollenberg et al. (Hollenberg)           EP 0 096 430            Dec. 21, 1983                                     
                        (European Patent Application)                                                                                      
                        Sunil Das, et al. (Das)  "A High-Frequency Transformation System for the                                           
                        Yeast Kluyveromyces lactis", Current Genetics, Vol. 6, pgs 123-128                                                 
                        (1982).                                                                                                            
                        The issues presented for review are: (1) whether the examiner erred in rejecting                                   
                claims 43, 45, 46, 48, 49, 52, 54, 56 and 57 under the judicially created doctrine of                                      
                obviousness-type double patenting over claims 1 and 6 through 12 of U.S. Patent No.                                        
                4,859,596; (2) whether the examiner erred in rejecting claims 47 and 58 under the                                          
                judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting over claims 1 and 6                                       
                through 12 of U.S. Patent No. 4,859,596 considered with Hitzeman; and (3) whether                                          
                the examiner erred in rejecting claims 43, 45, 46,  49, 52, 54 and 56 through 58 under                                     





                35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Hollenberg (European Patent Application 096                                           
                430) in view of Das, Kurjan, and Hitzeman.                                                                                 

                                                                    3                                                                      





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007