Appeal No. 1996-2013
Application No. 07/935,695
sufficient to support a conclusion of obviousness of claims requiring non-covalent linkage
between single chain polypeptides. Nor are we persuaded by the examiner’s comments in
response to appellants’ arguments. According to the examiner, “even if Huston did not
suggest noncovalent dimers . . . , there is no evidence on the record that a non-covalent Fv
dimer behaves any differently than a covalently bonded dimer and is therefore, considered
to be an obvious variant of the covalently bonded Fv dimers” (Examiner’s Answer, page 8).
This is tantamount to requiring a showing of unexpected results without having established
a prima facie case of obviousness in the first instance.
Both rejections of the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are reversed.
REVERSED
Sherman D. Winters )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
Douglas W. Robinson )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
Toni R. Scheiner )
Administrative Patent Judge )
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007