Appeal No. 2000-1779 Application No. 08/473,204 Bettler ’92 in view of Puckett: Claim 35: According to the examiner (Answer38, bridging paragraph, pages 4-5): Given the teachings of Puckett, the skilled artisan would have expected human GluR7 (EAA5a receptor) to be expressed in human brain and to have nucleic acid and amino acid sequences that are highly identical to those of rat GluR7 of Bettler [’92]. Accordingly, it would have been prima facie obvious to the skilled artisan to isolate a cDNA encoding human GluR7 by using the rat GluR7 of Bettler [’92] as a probe to screen the human brain cDNA library of Puckett and to transfect the isolated cDNA into mammalian host cells for production of the receptor. Thereafter, according to the examiner (Answer, page 5), it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to modify the assay of Bettler ’92 by using the isolated human GluR7 nucleic acid instead of the rat GluR7. In response to appellants’ arguments the examiner states (Answer, page 15) “Bettler [‘92] teaches isolation of the cDNA encoding rat GluR7 using the cDNA encoding rat GluR5 as a probe to screen a rat brain cDNA library [page 259]. Thus, the cited references provide sufficient guidance for obtaining the DNA encoding human EAA5a receptor.” We emphasize the examiner’s statement that Bettler ’92 uses rat GluR5 cDNA as a probe to isolate the rat GluR7 cDNA. This step was performed using low stringency hybridization conditions. Furthermore, the screening method taught by Puckett to isolate human cDNA using a rat cDNA probe also uses reduced stringency conditions (Puckett, bridging paragraph, pages 7557-558, and page 7558, Results, column 1). It appears to us that given the cross-reactivity of the 31Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007