Appeal No. 1999-1389
Application No. 08/618,485
baculovirus vector, as taught by Luckow, and to express the cloned
domain III of the Gc protein in insect cells, as taught by Luckow, as
recited in claim 3, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art at the time of Appellant’s invention to contact the recombinantly
expressed domain III of the Gc protein in vitro with immobilized ß-
galactosidase and sialidase, as taught by Yamamoto, as recited in
claim 4, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 1 and 2:
Appellant argues (Brief, page 6) that “the Office fails to show how or where
Luckow teaches that baculovirus could be successfully employed to express vitamin
D binding protein (i.e., Gc protein) in insects.” Appellant argues (Brief, page 7) that
Luckow “acknowledges the unpredictability of foreign protein expression by
baculovirus vectors” because Luckow recognize “differences in the
microheterogeneity of oligosaccharide structures are often observed for
mammalian glycoproteins expressed in different mammalian cell lines or by
individual cell lines under different culture conditions.” In response to appellant’s
arguments the examiner argues (Answer, page 7) that “Luckow teaches at the
paragraph bridging pages 15-16 that many baculovirus-expressed glycoproteins
retain full biologic activity in in vitro assays, which would create a reasonable
expectation of successfully using baculovirus vectors and insect cells for the
abundant and economical expression of a glycosylated Gc protein.”
With reference to Ausubel4, appellant argues (Brief, page 8) that “one skilled
in the art would not have had any such expectation of abundant, economical and
4 Expression of Protein in Insect Cells Using Baculoviral Vectors, in Current
Protocols in Molecular Biology, 6.8.1-6.11.7 (Ausubel et al., eds., Greene
Publishing and Wiley-Interscience, New York 1990).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007