NEMERSON et al. V. EDGINGTON et al. V. LAWN et al. - Page 47


             Interference No. 103,203                                                                          

             two errors in the nucleotide sequence shown in the computer printout of February 14,              
             1987, NRE 282, because the correct amino acid sequence shifts from reading frame A at             
             approximately nucleotide 347 (amino acid 47 of mature tissue factor) to reading frame B           
             and shifts back to being the correct amino acid in reading frame A at approximately amino         
             acid 82 (nucleotide 450).  Dr. Horton acknowledges that because of the errors in the              
             sequence, the amino acid sequence of the tissue factor protein is not the same as                 
             Nemerson’s final published version shown in NRE 64.  NR 1961-1970.  Dr. Horton                    
             eventually concedes that the nucleotide sequence shown in NRE 282 is not the correct              
             sequence coding for human tissue factor.  NR 1970.  Thus, we find Dr. Horton’s testimony          
             to be inconsistent with Dr. Bach’s, and fails to corroborate Dr. Spicer’s, testimony that         
             Nemerson et al. were in possession of the nucleotide sequence encoding the complete               
             tissue factor protein on February 3, 1987.  To the contrary, the computer printout, NRE           
             278, indicates that as late as February 14, 1987, Nemerson et al. still were not in               
             possession of a species within the scope of count 2.                                              
                   As to the testimony of Dr. Konigsberg, we find that he states that during a laboratory      
             meeting on February 4, 1987, Dr. Bach showed Nemerson Exhibit 277.  NR 1982.  Dr.                 
             Konigsberg further states that as a result of the discussions during said meeting they            
             decided to (i) rerun some of the sequencing gels to confirm an ambiguity between the              
             DNA and protein sequence, and (ii) rerun some other sequencing gels                               


                   of the subclones where the DNA was in a reverse orientation to determine whether            
                   the frameshift interpretation was due to G compression, thus leading to an apparent         
                   error in the DNA sequence.  From the results of this experiment, we also hoped to           
                   confirm that the carboxy-terminus of human tissue factor beginning at amino acid            
                   residue 258, consisted of Ser-Pro-Leu-Asn-Val-Ser, rather than His-Ser [NR 1983].           

                                                      47                                                       



Page:  Previous  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007