Ex parte KAMBOJ et al.; Ex parte NUTT; Ex parte FOLDES et al. - Page 110


                  Appeal No.  1999-1393                                                                                        
                  Application No.  08/242,344                                                                                  

                          Where the examiner fails to establish a prima facie case, the rejection is                           
                  improper and will be overturned.  In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596,                            
                  1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988).                                                                                       
                          Accordingly, we reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-11, 15 and 16                           
                  under 35 U.S.C. § 103.                                                                                       

                  Other matters:                                                                                               
                          The examiner and appellants should reconsider the scope of claim 7 to                                
                  determine whether the receptor is required to be present on the membrane.81                                  

                  Summary:                                                                                                     
                          We affirm the examiner’s rejection of claim 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,                                
                  second paragraph.                                                                                            
                          We remand the application to the examiner to further develop the rejection of                        
                  claim 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by the cDNA that was                                  
                  described in Figure 2 on page 33 of Moriyoshi.                                                               
                          We reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-11, 14 and 15 under 35                               
                  U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Moriyoshi in view of Puckett, Grandy and                             
                  Zhou.                                                                                                        
                          No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this                              
                  appeal may be extended under 37 CFR  1.136(a).                                                               


                                          AFFIRMED-IN-PART and REMANDED                                                        


                                                                                                                               
                  81 Compare Appeal No. 2000-1780.                                                                             

                                                             110                                                               



Page:  Previous  103  104  105  106  107  108  109  110  111  112  113  114  115  116  117  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007