Appeal No. 1999-1367
Application 08/453,998
GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claims 4, 10, 11, 13-17, 25, and 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second
paragraph, as indefinite.
Claims 4, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 25, and 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). As
evidence of obviousness, the examiner cites Cushing, Evans, Green (Nature), Green (Nuc.
Acids. Res.), Krust, West, and Martinez.
Claims 15 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). As evidence of
obviousness, the examiner cites Cushing, Evans, Green (Nature), Green (Nuc. Acids.
Res.), Krust, West, and Martinez as applied to the claims above, and further cites
Meyhack.
We reverse.
BACKGROUND
The claims on appeal involve a method of producing a foreign protein in yeast. The
coding sequence for the foreign protein is placed under an inducible expression control.
The induction mechanism is adopted from higher eukaryotic cells. A receptor protein is
expressed in the cell which has two functional parts: one part which binds a ligand to form
a complex, and one part which binds the complex to a specific sequence of DNA. The
specific sequence of DNA is termed a responsive element. When the receptor complex
binds to a responsive element linked to the foreign protein coding sequence, expression of
the foreign protein is induced. See, generally, specification pages 3 and 5. An example of
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007