Appeal No. 1999-0123
Application No. 08/406,239
GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claims 1-3, 23-25 and 76-95 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, as being based on an insufficient disclosure to support or enable the
scope of the claims drawn generically to hydrolases or inhibitors.2
Claims 1-46, 49-55, 59-63, 66-72 and 76-95 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, as being based on an insufficient disclosure to support or
enable the scope of the claims with respect to, inter alia, proteases, peptidases,
lipases, etc.
Claims 1-21 and 23-43 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Zherdev and Herrmann.
Claim 22 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Zherdev and Herrmann further in view of Mielke.
Claims 76-95 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Zherdev, Herrmann and Mielke further in view of Goldman.
We reverse.
2 We note the rejection of claims 1-3, 23-25 and 76-95 is directly connected and
relates to the objection to the specification. In re Hengehold, 440 F.2d 1395, 1403-
1404, 169 USPQ 473, 479-480 (CCPA 1971).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007