Ex parte RAULSTON et al. - Page 2




                 Appeal No. 1996-3887                                                                                                                   
                 Application 07/883,434                                                                                                                 


                                                           DECISION ON APPEAL                                                                           
                          This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C.  134 from the final rejection of claims 16                                                 
                 through 22, 42, 43, 46 and 47, the only claims remaining in the application.  Claims 16, 46                                            
                 and 47 are representative and read as follows:                                                                                         
                          16.  A composition for use as a biopesticide comprising an insecticidally effective                                           
                 amount of entomopathogenic Steinernema riobravis isolated from the environment and an                                                  
                 inert carrier.                                                                                                                         
                          46.  The composition as described in claim 16 wherein said Steinernema riobravis                                              
                 are isolated and substantially pure.                                                                                                   
                          47.  The composition as described in claim 16 wherein said Steinernema  riobravis                                             
                 are isolated in pure form.                                                                                                             

                          New grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C.  101 and 102(b) were entered in the                                                
                 Examiner’s Answer (paper no.15, October 21, 1994).  Following the entry of two Reply                                                   
                 Briefs (paper no.16, December 27, 1994; paper no. 20, July 20, 1995), two Supplemental                                                 
                 Answers (paper no. 19, May 17, 1995; paper no. 21, September 14, 1995), an                                                             
                 amendment (paper no. 17, December 27, 1994), and an Advisory Action (paper no. 18,                                                     
                 March 9, 1995), the claims stand rejected as follows:                                                                                  
                          I.  Claims 16 through 22, 42 , 43, 46 and 47 under 35 U.S.C.  101 (non-statutory                                             
                 subject matter).                                                                                                                       
                          II.  Claims 16 though 19, 21, 22, 42, 43, 46 and 47 under 35 U.S.C.  102(b) as                                               
                 anticipated by “the soil in a field in the lower Rio Grande Valley which soil contains the                                             
                 indigenous nematodes of S. riobravis.”                                                                                                 


                                                                           2                                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007