Appeal No. 1996-0657
Application 07/919,784
reverse the rejection of claims 5, 6, 8, 12, and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Discussion
Independent claim 5 recites a “biologically pure” anti-fungal composition
containing (a) endochitinase coded for by a gene in the genome of a fungus; and
(b) a specified exochitinase, hereinafter referred to as chitobiosidase, also coded
for by a gene in the genome of a fungus and defined in terms of the assay
described in appellants’ specification (page 7, lines 5 through 22). As explained in
the specification, endochitinase cleaves glycosidic linkages randomly along the
polysaccharride chain of chitin; chitobiosidase cleaves dimeric units from one end
of chitin. Claim 5 recites the weight ratio of (a):(b) ranging from 3:1 to 1:1.2.
Dependent claims 6, 12, and 13 also recite compositions. These claims
further limit the weight ratio or source material of components (a) and (b).
Claim 8 recites a method of inhibiting the germination or replication of a chitin-
containing fungus of a genus selected from the group consisting of Botrytis,
Fusarium, Saccharomyces, Trichoderma, Uncinula, and Ustilago, by contacting
such fungus with an antifungal effective amount of the composition of claim 5.
The examiner argues that a first set of references (Takara, Ohtakara et al.,
Ôtakara (I), and Yabuki) disclose endochitinase from a fungal source; that a second
set of references (Pedraza-Reyes (I), Pedraza-Reyes (II), Ohtakara (II), and Arroyo-
Begovich) disclose chitobiosidase from a fungal source; and that it would have
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007