Interference 103,579
request then shall be dismissed as moot.
A. Claim interpretation
(1) Claim language
We proceed to interpret the meaning of the various terms
used by the parties to define the subject matter encompassed by
each of the following representative claims designated as
corresponding to the count so to facilitate our comparison of
their respective claims:
Hofvander’s Claim 4
A fragment of a potato gene coding for . . . GBSS
. . . selected from the group consisting of SEQ No. 1,
SEQ ID No. 2 and SEQ ID No. 3.
Hofvander’s Claim 6
An isolated potato gene coding for . . . GBSS . . .
having the nucleotide sequence stated in SEQ ID No. 5.
Visser’s Claim 23
A homologous construct . . . comprising a full
length potato . . . GBSS cDNA or genomic DNA.
Hofvander’s Claim 7
An antisense construct for inhibiting expression
of the potato gene which codes for . . . GBSS . . .
comprising:
. . . a promoter, and
. . . a fragment of a potato gene coding for
. . . GBSS inserted in the antisense direction . . .
selected from the group consisting of SEQ No. 1,
SEQ ID No. 2 and SEQ ID No. 3.
-28-
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007