Ex parte RASMUSSEN et al. - Page 12


                  Appeal No.  1998-1719                                                                                      
                  Application No.  08/442,603                                                                                
                         glucocerebrosidase could be secreted into a culture medium in                                       
                         significant amounts by mammalian cells.                                                             
                  Barsomian declaration, ¶ 5.                                                                                
                         Declaratory evidence as to issues of fact is entitled to substantial weight.  In                    
                  re Alton, 76 F.3d 1168, 37 USPQ2d 1578 (Fed. Cir. 1996).  The examiner has not                             
                  disputed Dr. Barsomian’s statements that a person of ordinary skill in the art would                       
                  expect a lysosomal enzyme such as glucocerebrosidase to be targeted to                                     
                  lysosomes in mammalian cells, and that its secretion from the claimed cells was                            
                  unexpected.  Rather, she argues that secretion of glucocerebrosidase from the                              
                  claimed cells does not overcome the prima facie case because “the skilled artisan                          
                  would have expected the claimed CHO cells to be useful regardless of the ability of                        
                  the cells to secrete the glucocerebrosidase.”                                                              
                         In order to outweigh a prima facie case of obviousness, evidence of                                 
                  unobviousness must show unexpected property of a significant aspect of the                                 
                  invention.  See In re Eli Lilly & Co., 902 F.2d 943, 947, 14 USPQ2d 1741, 1745-46                          
                  (Fed. Cir. 1990).  However, “when an applicant demonstrates substantially                                  
                  improved results . . . and states that the results were unexpected, this should suffice                    
                  to establish unexpected results in the absence of evidence to the contrary.”  In re                        
                  Soni, 54 F.3d 746, 751, 34 USPQ2d 1684, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (emphases in                                 
                  original).                                                                                                 
                         Here, Appellants have presented unrebutted evidence that the claimed cells                          
                  display not merely an improvement in a known property, but a property that was                             
                  unknown and unexpected based on the prior art.  Since the disclosed utility of the                         


                                                             12                                                              



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007