Appeal No. 1995-1993
Application 07/661,370
inspection” of the HIV and FIV envelope proteins shows that they are “analogous” or
“strikingly similar.” As pointed out by the appellants, the record demonstrates that persons
of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that HIV and FIV are both phylogenically
and antigenically distinct. Brief, pp. 10-13. For example, Pedersen and Olmsted I4
unequivocally state that FIV is not antigenically related to HIV. Pedersen, col. 3, lines 5-8;
Olmsted I, p. 2452, lines, 3-5. In addition, as we discussed above, Talbott suggests that
FIV and HIV are phylogenically distinct. Talbott, p. 5746, Figure 4. Finally, the most
compelling evidence of record which provides a direct comparison of nucleotide and
deduced amino acid sequences of FIV with other lentiviruses, including HIV, has been
5
ignored by the examiner. We direct attention to Olmsted II wherein it is reported that
significant sequence identities exist only in the gag and pol genes of FIV and other
lentiviruses. Olmsted II, the abstract. Olmsted II concludes that “In each of the four
analyses, the horizontal distances and branch orders indicate that FIV is more closely
related to the nonprimate lentiviruses (EAIV and visna virus) than to the primate lentiviruses
[HIV and SAIDS].” Olmsted II, p. 8091, col. 2, last para.
Cutting to the chase, the only location on this record, where we find a suggestion
that the FIV 0.4 envelope protein is antigenic, is in the appellants’ specification. Thus, in
4A reference provided by the appellants (Paper No. 6; attachment to the Information
Disclosure Statement) and cited in their Brief. Brief, p. 12.
5A reference provided by the appellants in Paper No. 23 and cited in their Brief.
Brief, p. 11.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007