Appeal No. 1997-2372
Application 08/083,945
enablement for recovering heparin from solution which would be implied in a method of
purification. Examiner’s answer, page 5, lines 13-21.
Appellants respond to this argument with rebuttal evidence showing that ionic
bonds form between heparin and heparin binding proteins and that such bonds are readily
dissociated under mild conditions by raising the salt concentration of the medium. Reply
Brief, page 6 and Exhibits A-K. For this reason, appellants submit that one of ordinary
skill in the art would not expect to encounter any difficulties in effecting elution if a heparin
affinity column were used for purification. Reply Brief, page 6.
In our view, the examiner has failed to present a sufficient factual basis or evidence
to rebut the argument and evidence presented by appellants. Therefore, we disagree with
the examiner with respect to the examiner’s position of lack of enablement of claims 36
and 37, and find these claims to be enabled by the present specification. It would appear
that the specification reasonably describes how to make and how to use peptides with
binding affinity to heparin (claim 37), and a specific peptide (SEQ ID NO:7) with binding
affinity to heparin (Claim 36), in a manner sufficient for those of ordinary skill in the art to
practice the claimed invention within the scope of these claims. We agree with appellants
that the examiner has failed to establish that the polypeptides of claims 36 and 37 could
not be used in affinity purification of heparin.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007