Appeal No. 1995-1993
Application 07/661,370
Rejection II
For the reasons explained above, we do not find that the subject matter of claim 54
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art over applied prior art. Although
the examiner has additionally applied O’Connor in the second rejection, we do not find that
the reference makes up for the shortcomings previously discussed. O’Connor discloses a
kit for detecting the presence of FIV antibodies in a biological sample; however, he fails to
suggest the use of the FIV 0.4 envelope protein in said kit. Accordingly, rejection II is
reversed.
REVERSED
William F. Smith )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
Joan Ellis )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
Hubert C. Lorin )
Administrative Patent Judge )
JE/dm
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007