Appeal No. 95-3337
Application No. 07/759,100
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
SHERMAN D. WINTERS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
) BOARD OF PATENT
) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
BRADLEY R. GARRIS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
KIMLIN, Administrative Patent Judge, dissenting:
I respectfully disagree with the conclusion reached by
the majority. Since appellant's specification readily
acknowledges that it was known to formulate synthetic infant
milk based on cow's milk (page 1 of specification), and that
EPO Application 181,634 discloses the production of human
lysozyme by recombinant genetic engineering techniques
Rather, in the Answer, the examiner broadly refers to portions
of the specification (e.g., pages 7-10) which she seems to
believe represent acknowledged prior art. This merits panel
has not been briefed by the appellant or the examiner
respecting those portions of EPO Application 181,634 which may
teach toward or away from the claimed invention. In fact, it
is unclear whether the EPO application is even of record. For
these reasons, we will not assess or further comment upon the
obviousness exposition of the dissent.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007