Ex parte DE LA BROUSSE et al. - Page 4


                Appeal No. 2001-1148                                                  Page 4                  
                Application No. 09/114,552                                                                    

                      Claim 11 is directed to a genetic knock-in primary mammalian adipocyte                  
                isolated from a transgenic mouse. The claimed adipocyte is a progeny of a genetic             
                knock-in cell. The genetic knock-in cell is made by homologous recombination of a             
                native ob allele with a transgene; the transgene comprising a sequence encoding a             
                reporter flanked by flanking sequences and residing on a chromosome in the                    
                transgenic mouse. According to the claimed invention, expression of the reporter is           
                under the control of native gene expression regulatory sequences of the native ob             
                allele and the flanking sequences effect, in conjunction with the cell, the homologous        
                recombination of the transgene with the native ob allele.                                     
                      Examiner has applied Kress, Kitamoto, Sista, Tartaglia, Dubuc, Halaas,                  
                Cusin, and Capecchi. The parties largely agree on what the references teach. In               
                fact, appellants’ (Brief, p. 6) state that “[a]pplicants readily acknowledge that all         
                pieces of their cells, animals and methods exist in the prior art. ” Accordingly, there       
                is no dispute that each and every element of the claimed invention is disclosed in            
                one or more of the cited references2 and therefore we need not determine whether              

                any particular element in the claims is taught in the prior art references. Since             
                “identification in the prior art of each individual part claimed is insufficient to defeat    
                patentability of the whole claimed invention,” In re Kotzab, 217 F. 3d 1365, 1369, 55         

                                                                                                              
                2 Appellants’ (Brief, p. 3) acknowledge that “[t]he Final Action aptly cites references that teach how
                to make transgenic animals (Capecchi), how to perform replacement (Kitamoto) and insertional  
                (Kress) mutagenesis, the knowledge and importance of the ob gene (Dubuc, Halaas and Cusin),   
                how to screen for drugs using a transcriptional reporter assay (Sista), how to use genes      
                differentially expressed in obese mice (Tartaglia), and from all these pieces, constructs a   
                reasonable facsimile of the claimed invention.”                                               






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

Last modified: November 3, 2007