Ex Parte PAGE - Page 37




               Dr. Youle’s testimony:                                                                                                 
                       In its preliminary motions 3 and 5, Glaxo does not point us to any particular portion of                       
               Dr. Youle’s testimony.  Accordingly, as noted above, we do not find Glaxo’s arguments that rely                        
               upon Dr. Youle’s testimony to be persuasive.  At any rate, when we review Dr. Youle’s                                  
               testimony, we do not find that it shows that the Cabilly applications fail to provide written                          
               description for antibodies that are glycosylated by CHO cells.                                                         
                       At the outset we wish to note that it is not clear to us from Glaxo’s arguments if it is                       
               Glaxo’s position that a CHO cell would not be expected to glycosylate an antibody it expresses.                        
               For example, on the one hand, Glaxo states that “[a]s clearly documented in Youle Declaration 1                        
               [Exhibit 2012], glycosylation of antibodies by CHO cells is not inherent” (Paper 51 at 14).  On                        
               the other hand, Glaxo states that “[it] is possible to control and inhibit the glycosylation of an                     
               antibody expressed by a CHO cell” (Paper 49 at 11-12),  “even if a CHO cell usually inherently                         
               expresses a glycosylated antibody, the glycosylation could be removed before attempting to use                         
               the antibody for treatment”,  and that “GWI does not dispute that the antibody of Cabilly’s                            
               claims 56-60 could have been glycosylated, [since] [t]he claims recite an antibody expressed by                        
               CHO cells” (Paper 156 at 5- 6).  Dr. Youle’s testimony does not help us clarify Glaxo’s position.                      
                       Dr. Youle testified that, in view of Cabilly’s statement that glycosylation can be                             
               “undesirable”, he “would be reluctant to attempt to use eukaryotic organisms [such as CHO                              
               cells] to express recombinant antibodies in order to avoid possible undesirable effects of                             
               glycosylation on antibody production” (FF 51).  Moreover, Dr. Youle testified that, in CHO cells                       
               expressing antibodies, it would have been possible to take steps to either inhibit glycosylation or                    
               to remove the sugar groups after glycosylation (FF 51).  Thus, a portion of Dr. Youle’s testimony                      


                                                                -37-                                                                  





Page:  Previous  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007