Appeal No. 95-3606
Application 07/827,691
“useful,” in the sense that a patent can be granted on
it,
unless substantial or practical utility for the invention
has been discovered and disclosed where such utility
would
not be obvious. Brenner v. Manson, 383 U.S. 519, ....,
148 USPQ 689 (1966).
Unlike the language of method Claim 41 and all claims
dependent thereon, the language of kit Claim 42 and all claims
dependent thereon reasonably may be interpreted consistent
with the teaching in the specification, appellants’ arguments,
and the art made of record in this application to include
materials for use in methods which cannot be used to reliably
determine whether an individual carries a mutation for Fragile
X. For example,
see the results reported in applicants’ Fig. 1, explained in
Example 1 as follows (Spec., Example 1, p. 23, l. 12-24).
DNA isolated from: (1) a normal individual (lanes 1);
(2) a fragile X carrier male (lanes 2); (3) a male
afflicted with the fragile X syndrome (lanes 3); and
(4) a female fragile X carrier (lanes 4) were subjected
to PCR in the presence of different proportions of
7-deaza-2'-dGTP to dGTP (100:0; 75:25; 50:50). The
PCR products were analyzed by blot hybridization using
a probe B (described above) complementary to the CGG
repeat region of the FMR-1 locus. Figure 1 shows the
results of this analysis. Note that the high molecular
weight bands were detected only in the presence of 100%
7-deaza-2'-dGTP, 0% dGTP. In other words, the fully
mutated fragile X gene was only detected when the PCR
reaction mixture was substantially free of dGTP.
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007