Appeal No. 2000-1780
Application No. 08/403,663
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
31
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007