Appeal No. 2000-0461 Page 2
Application No. 08/460,569
Claim 3 is illustrative of the subject matter on appeal and is reproduced
below:
3. An antigenic construct comprising a cytotoxic T cell stimulating
allogenic major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I antigen linked
at its C-terminal end to a target-cell-specific carrier molecule.
The references relied upon by the examiner are:
Greenfield et al. (Greenfield) 4,894,443 Jan. 16, 1990
Sharma et al. (Sharma) 5,130,297 Jul. 14, 1992
Liu et al. (Liu), “Hormone Conjugated with Antibody to CD3 Mediates Cytotoxic
T Cell Lysis of Human Melanoma Cells,” Science, Vol. 239, pp. 395-398 (1988)
Mezzanzanica et al. (Mezzanzanica), “Human Ovarian Carcinoma Lysis by
Cytotoxic T Cells Targeted by Bispecific Monoclonal Antibodies: Analysis of the
Antibody Components,” Int. J. Cancer, Vol. 41, pp. 609-615 (1988)
GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over the combination of Sharma and Greenfield, with or without Liu
or Mezzanzanica.2
We reverse.
DISCUSSION
According to appellants’ specification (page 1) “[t]issue-rejection reactions
are the strongest-known immune responses mediated by T cells. In individuals
of the same species they are caused by allogenic differences in class I and class
II MHC antigens.” However, as appellants explain (Brief, page 4) “[a]lthough
2 We note that the examiner set forth two prior art rejections: “Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11 and []15 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. [§] 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sharma … in view of
Greenfield…” (Answer, page 3); and “Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11 and []15 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. [§]103(a) as being unpatentable over Liu … or Mezzanzaniza … in view of Sharma …
and further in view of Greenfield…” (Answer, page 5). However, for administrative convenience
we have consolidated the two prior art rejections of record into the single statement of the
rejection hereinabove.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007