Appeal No. 1996-1038
Application 07/922,492
a method for distinguishing IBV serotypes. The secondary reference to Binns adds
nothing more to the teaching of Lin since Binns merely discloses the nucleotide sequence
of both the S1 and S2 genes of IBV.
In conclusion, we find no reasonable teaching or suggestion in either Lin or Binns
concerning a method for distinguishing between serotypes of IBV by amplifying the S1
gene region of IBV and digesting the amplified gene regions with the three specifically
recited RE enzymes. In addition, we find no reasonable teaching or suggestion in either
Lin or Binns for the specific primers for amplifying the S1 gene region, as recited in claims
8 through 11, since Lin analyzes only the S2 gene of IBV and Binns merely sequences the
entire S1 and S2 genes of IBV. For these reasons, we reverse the examiner’s rejection
under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
OTHER ISSUES
From a review of the application file, it does not appear that the examiner
searched for all of the possible nucleotide sequences of the primers as recited in claims
8 through 11 since no documentation of a sequence search on these primers can be found in
the administrative file. Upon return of the application, the examiner should ensure that all
available electronic databases have been searched. In so doing, the examiner should
recognize that the primer claims are “comprising” in nature and are,
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007