Appeal No. 1997-2639
Application No. 08/237,129
Under the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b), we enter the following new ground of
rejection against appellants' claims 21 and 22. Claims 21 and 22 are rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102/103 over Fohlman in view of Lind.
Claim 21 is directed to a composition of matter comprising a desalted carrier fluid
containing a cell growth factor, wherein the cell growth factor consists essentially of a
peptide, wherein the first 15 amino acids from the N-terminus of said peptide are identified
in SEQ ID No: 1. Claim 22, dependent upon claim 21, further requires that the peptide
consists of beta taipoxin obtained from snake venom.
Appellant submits that the “desalted carrier fluid” and cell growth factor of claim 21
is the $-taipoxin protein fraction described in the specification, at page 5, lines 1-3, which
1
has been subjected to a dialysis procedure. The appellant suggests at Paper 26 , page 2,
that, in dialysis, “the membrane enclosing the protein solution is semipermeable, and that
water and small solutes, such as glucose or NaCl, pass through the membrane but
proteins do not.” Lehninger, page 134, 135, Figure 7.6. Apparently, appellant would
have us interpret the term “desalted carrier fluid” in claim 21, as a carrier which includes no
1During the oral hearing, the Board requested clarification, and an indication of
support in the specification for the term “desalted carrier fluid” in claim 21, and indicated
that it would accept submission of a paper after the oral hearing indicating such support.
Ex parte Cillario, 14 USPQ2d 1079 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1989). Appellant subsequently
submitted Paper No 26, providing an indication of support for the term “desalted carrier
fluid” in the specification, along with explanatory information relating to dialysis procedures
in Lehninger, to aid in the interpretation of the term.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007