Appeal No. 96-0051 Page 6
Application No. 07/987,256
On the record before us, the examiner has not carried her burden of
demonstrating undue experimentation.
The examiner gives no specific rationale for the written
description rejection. We note that the specification lists "nucleic
acid constructs...designed to decrease expression of endogenous
synthase...[using] an anti-sense synthase under the control of a
promotor" as part of the invention (Paper No. 1 at 9; see also Paper
No. 1 at 13 and 17). Absent a clearer statement of the rejection, a
preponderance of the evidence of record supports a finding of
adequate written description.
Enabling support for the 50 kD claims
The claim with the 50 kD protein element, claim 21, and claims
depending from it stand rejected as not enabled because it is not
clear which 50 kD protein is characterized by the disclosed amino-
acid and encoding polynucleotide sequences (Paper No. 37 at 6). The
examiner notes that several 50 kD proteins are mentioned in the
specification, including a protein contaminant, a protein related to
synthase I activity, and a protein related to synthase II activity
(Paper No. 37 at 11).
Claim 21 does not refer to the protein contaminant. The point
of the ACP-Sepharose column was to isolate proteins with synthase
activity. ACP (acyl carrier protein) is part of the substrate for
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007