Appeal No. 1996-1002
Application 07/988,945
BACKGROUND
The invention is described at page 3 of the specification as being directed to an
antibody composition which inhibits the binding of interleukin 2 to its high affinity
receptor. The composition is described as a combination comprising a monoclonal
antibody against the " chain of the interleukin 2 receptor (IK-2R") and a monoclonal
antibody against the interleukin 2 receptor $ chain (IK-2R$) of the interleukin 2
receptor. The use, in combination, of monoclonal antibodies against the "-chain and
the $-chain of the IL-2 receptor is said to lead to a synergistic effect resulting in a
stronger inhibition of the IL-2 induced proliferation of human peripheral blood
lymphocytes.
DISCUSSION
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph
The examiner has rejected claim 27 based on the presence, therein, of the term
"humanized" which the examiner urges is ambiguous. We point out that it is well
established that "definiteness of the language employed must be analyzed, not in a
vacuum, but always in light of the prior art and of the particular application disclosure as
it would be interpreted by one possessing the ordinary level of skill in the pertinent art."
In re Moore, 439 F.2d 1232, 1235, 169 USPQ 236, 238 (CCPA 1971). Here, both the
examiner (Answer, page 14) and appellants (Brief, page 10) agree that the term
"humanized", used in the context of claim 27, is an art recognized term and that
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007