Appeal No. 2000-0461 Page 4
Application No. 08/460,569
whole and consideration must be given where the reference teaches away from
the claimed invention. Akzo N.V., Aramide Maatschappij v.o.f. v. United States
Int’l Trade Comm’n, 808 F.2d 1471, 1481, 1 USPQ2d 1241, 1246 (Fed. Cir.
1986).
As the title makes clear, Sharma’s invention is directed at MHC-II-peptide
conjugates useful in ameliorating autoimmunity. As appellants explain (Brief,
pages 13-14):
MHC class II glycoproteins are found on the surfaces of
several cells, “and are involved in the presentation of antigens to
helper T cells.” … Since Sharma’s compositions target helper
T cells via a complex of an antigen and an MHC protein, and that
MHC protein must function to present antigen to helper T cells, the
MHC protein must be a class II protein. …
In Sharma’s complexes for treating autoimmune diseases,
the MHC portion of the complex binds to T helper cells … which
leads to the destruction of T helper cells responsible for
autoimmunity. If MHC Class I antigen were substituted for the
MHC Class II moiety in Sharma’s conjugates, the conjugates would
be inoperative. MHC Class I does not bind to T helper cells.
The examiner however is not persuaded by appellants’ arguments.
Instead, the examiner finds (Answer, page 7) that Sharma “is not limited to
constructs which downregulate helper T cells in the treatment of autoimmune
diseases since the specification of Sharma et al. clearly discloses constructs in
which the MHC component is MHC Class I.” According to the examiner (id.)
Sharma “clearly disclose the MHC component of [the] construct can be either
Class I or Class II ([]see [Figure 1 and] column 4, lines 31-column 5, lines 31, in
particular).
Appellants agree (Brief, page 13) that Figure 1, “does appear to indicate
that MHC class I or II molecules may serve as a component in Sharma’s
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007