Ex parte BURNETT et al. - Page 2




             Appeal No. 1997-0791                                                                                 
             Application No. 08/172,332                                                                           


                    The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the               
             appealed claim is:                                                                                   
             Berger, “Guide to Molecular Cloning Techniques,” Method in Enzymology, Vol. 152, pp                  
             393-99, 415-23, 432-49 and 663-04 (1987).                                                            
             Gerard, et al. (Gerard), “The Human Neurokinin A (Substance K) Receptor,” The Journal of             
             Biological Chemistry, Vol. 265, No. 33, pp 20455-62 (1990).                                          
             Grandy et al. (Grandy), “Cloning of the cDNA and gene for a human D2 dopamine                        
             receptor,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol. 86, pp 9762-66 (1989).                                   
             Sommer et al. (Sommer), “Flip and Flop: A Cell-Specific Functional Switch in Glutamate-              
             Operated Channels of the CNS,” Science, Vol. 246, pp 1580-85 (1990).                                 
             Qun-Yong Zhou et al. (Zhou), “Cloning and expression of human and rat D  dopamine                    
                                                                                       1                          
             receptors,” Nature, Vol. 347, pp 76-80 (1990).                                                       
             Puckett, et al. (Puckett), “Molecular cloning and chromosomal localization of one of the             
             human glutamate receptor genes,” Proc. Natl. Acad.. Sci. USA, Vol. 88, pp 7557-61                    
             (1991).                                                                                              
             Heinemann, et al. (Heinemann)           WO 91/06648                May 16, 1991                      

                                                    OPINION                                                       
                    In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the           
             appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the                
             respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.                                 
                    Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the             
             appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the Examiner's                  


                                                        2                                                         





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007