Appeal No. 2000-1929
Application No. 08/019,297
Summary
We affirm the rejection of claims 28-30, 35, and 42 because the
specification does not disclose a patentable utility for the claimed immune
complexes. With the exception of the written description rejection of claims 30
and 42, we affirm the rejection of all the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, because the specification provides neither an enabling disclosure nor
an adequate written description of the claimed invention. Finally, we affirm the
rejection for anticipation because the none of the claims on appeal are entitled to
priority under either 35 U.S.C. §§ 119 or 120, and therefore Di Marzo Veronese
is prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). Thus, we affirm the rejection of all the
claims on at least one ground.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this
appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
SHERMAN D. WINTERS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
DONALD E. ADAMS )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
ERIC GRIMES )
Administrative Patent Judge )
22
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007