Appeal No. 95-4440
Application 07/841,707
examiner stated (p. 2):
Pursuant to the Remand under 37 CFR 1.193(b)(1) by
the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences on April 2,
1998, a supplemental Examiner’s Answer is set forth
below:
Upon further consideration, the rejections of claims
19-20 under 35 USC 102 (a or b) and under 35 USC 103
still
stand only insofar as the mutant strains are concerned.
The difference between the claimed mutant strains and the
strains disclosed by the prior art of record cannot [be]
ascertained.
Discussion
The “supplemental Examiner’s Answer” leaves this panel
perplexed. The examiner previously found that the A.
pullulans strains and mutants disclosed by Bock, Kato,
Leathers, Wickerham, Na, and Kelly anticipate one or more of
appellants’ A. pullulans ATCC 74100, A. pullulans ATCC 74101,
A. pullulans ATCC 74102, A. pullulans ATCC 74103, A. pullulans
ATCC 74104, and A. pullulans ATCC 74105, because (1) Bock’s A.
pullulans strain 56 is “capable of producing pullulan having a
lower quantity of melanin” (Examiner’s Answer (Ans.), p. 3,
2nd full para.); (2) Kato’s
A. pullulans strains IFO 4464, IFO 4875, IFO 6353, IFO 6401,
IFO 6402, and IFO 6725 . . . [are] “capable of producing
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007