Appeal No. 2000-1780
Application No. 08/403,663
Appeal No. 1999-211851
Application No. 08/439,946
Claims 22 and 31 are illustrative of the subject matter on appeal52 and are
reproduced below:
22. A method of assaying interaction between a test ligand and a human
CNS receptor, which comprises the steps of incubating the test ligand
under appropriate conditions with a cellular host having incorporated
expressibly therein a heterologous polynucleotide that encodes human
GluR2B comprising the amino acid sequence of amino acids 1-863 of
SEQ ID NO:2, or with a membrane preparation derived from said
cellular host, and determining the extent of interaction between the
human GluR2B and the test ligand.
31. A method according to claim 22, wherein said cellular host is a
mammalian cell.
GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claims 22, 32 and 34-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Heinemann in view of Puckett and Sun.
Claims 31 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Heinemann, Puckett and Sun as applied to claims 22, 32 and 34-40 above
and further in view of Cutting.
We reverse.
51 We recognize appellants’ request (Paper No. 39, received May 18, 1999) for
oral hearing in this appeal. However, in our review of this appeal we find a hearing
is not necessary. 37 CFR § 1.194(c). Accordingly, we make our decision on brief.
52 We note the examiner’s statement (Answer, page 2) regarding the errors
contained in appellants’ Appendix of claims.
61
Page: Previous 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007