Ex Parte ESTES et al - Page 8



             Appeal No. 2000-1559                                                              Page 8               
             Application No. 07/911,593                                                                             
                                                                                                                   
             attenuated virus disclosed by Ward.  In other words, the prior art disclosure of a live,               
             attenuated virus fully meets applicants' claim limitation requiring a live virus.                      
                    The rejection of claims 5 through 7, 12, 13, and 19 through 27 under 35 U.S.C.                  
             § 102(e) as anticipated by Ward is affirmed.                                                           


                                    Zygraich and Ijaz, in view of Estes or Smith                                    
                    The examiner rejected all of the appealed claims for obviousness "over Zygraich                 
             and Ijaz, in view of Estes or Smith."  For the purposes of this appeal, we have treated                
             the rejection as though presented in two parts: (1) all of the appealed claims rejected                
             for obviousness over Zygraich and Ijaz, further taken in view of Estes; and (2) all of the             
             appealed claims rejected for obviousness over Zygraich and Ijaz, further taken in view                 
             of Smith.                                                                                              
                    In our judgment, the examiner has considerably overstated the import of Estes.                  
             The examiner's position to the contrary, notwithstanding, Estes does not teach using                   
             expressed VP6 as a vaccine (Examiner's Answer, page 10, lines 13 through 17).                          
             Rather, in the concluding paragraph, Estes discloses that:                                             
                           Future efforts will evaluate the use of expressed VP6 as a vaccine,                      
                    using animal models that can measure passive and active protection                              
                    against virus challenge.  Antisera to expressed VP6 produced in the                             
                    current study did not neutralize virus in plaque reduction assays.  This                        
                    result agrees with previous reports that monoclonal antibodies to VP6 do                        
                    not neutralize virus in vitro, but it contrasts with other reports that                         
                    antiserum to gel-purified VP6 possesses low titers of neutralizing                              
                    antibodies.  The inability of the expressed VP6 to induce neutralizing                          
                    antibodies, however, does not rule out a possible role for this protein in                      
                    inducing protection from infection or disease, as our understanding of the                      
                    immunologic and nonimmunologic mechanisms that are critical to induce                           
                    protection from rotavirus infection and disease remains incomplete.  VP6                        





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007