Appeal No. 2001-0693 Page 2 Application No. 08/898,300 (enablement). The examiner does not rely upon any evidence in support of this rejection. We reverse. Discussion Parent Application 08/346,849 has now issued as U.S. Patent No. 5,670,483 ('483 patent). The enablement issue raised by the examiner can be put in perspective in comparing claim 37 of this application reproduced above with claim 1 of the '483 patent which reads as follows: 1. A macroscopic membrane which is formed by self-assembly of amphiphilic peptides in an aqueous solution containing monovalent metal cations, wherein the peptides contain 12 or more amino acids, have alternating hydrophobic and hydrophilic amino acids, and are complementary and structurally compatible. As seen, claim 1 of the '483 patent is the same as claim 37 on appeal with one important difference. Claim 1 of the '483 patent further limits the amphiphilic peptides which form the macroscopic membrane to those which have twelve or more amino acids in length. Claim 37 on appeal places no limitation on the length of the amphiphilic peptides. The issue raised by the examiner in the present enablement rejection is whether one skilled in the art would be able to make and use macroscopic membranes from amphiphilic peptides having the three stated requirements of claim 37, i.e., alternating hydrophobic and hydrophilic amino acids, complementary and structurally compatible1, wherein the peptides are less than 12 amino acids in length. In stating the rejection on pages 3-4 of the Examiner's Answer, the examiner emphasizes one fact, i.e., the vast majority of the original disclosure of this application 1 Hereinafter, these three properties will be referred to s “alternating, complemetary and structural.”Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007