Appeal No. 1995-4400
Application 07/694,302
4) Claims 1-4, 7-16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Minson in view of Chesebro and Earl.
DISCUSSION
102(a) over '91 MTA
The facts are:
· On February 28, 1991, Robertson, a co-inventor, signed and dated a Material Transfer
Agreement transferring monoclonal antibody 720 to recipient and non-inventor Specter;
· This application (07/694,302) was accorded a filing date of May 2, 1991, designating
Robertson, Chesebro, Miyazawa and Britt as co-inventors;
· On May 24, 1991, Britt signed and dated the declaration under 37 CFR § 1.63;
· On May 28, 1991, Miyazawa signed and dated the declaration under 37 CFR
§ 1.63;
· On May 30, 1991, Robertson signed and dated the declaration under 37 CFR
§ 1.63; and,
· On June 17, 1991, Chesebro signed and dated the declaration under 37 CFR
§ 1.63.
The facts include the four declarations under 37 CFR §1.63 but we need not
address them. They are relied upon to support appellants' case in rebuttal and extensively
discussed. Since the examiner has not satisfied the initial burden of establishing a prima
facie case of unpatentability, we do not reach them.
claim 18 rather than claim 17.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007