Ex Parte BOCHES et al - Page 5



             Appeal No.  1999-0334                                                             Page 5                
             Application No. 08/150,747                                                                              
             obvious . . . to use the anti-folate binding protein and species-specific antibodies of                 
             Høier-Madsen [ ] and Litt, respectively, in the folate assay of Gutcho [ ] because Suter                
             [ ] teach[es] that antibodies directly adsorbed on a solid phase may have reduced                       
             binding due to altered antigen binding sites and Litt teaches that a double antibody solid              
             phase provides a more stable, reproducible assay reagent.@  In addition, the examiner                   
             maintains that A[t]he skilled artisan would have had a reasonable expectation of                        
             success in using the anti-[folate binding protein] antibodies of Høier-Madsen [ ] with the              
             species-specific antibodies of Litt or the biotin/streptavidin coupling system of Suter [ ]             
             to immobilize the folate binding protein in the assay of Gutcho [ ] because Suter [ ] and               
             Litt teach that using intermediate binding structures for immobilizing the antigen-specific             
             binding protein provides advantages of increased binding and stability.@  Examiner=s                    
             Answer, pages 4-5.                                                                                      
                    Appellants argue that A[t]his is not the present invention.@  Brief, page 6.  We                 
             agree.  Indeed, the combination of elements proposed by the examiner scarcely                           
             resembles the claimed method.  We cannot overemphasize the importance of                                
             beginning an analysis of patentability Awith a key legal question -- what is the invention              
             claimed?@ since A[c]laim interpretation . . . will normally control the remainder of the                
             decisional process,@ Panduit Corp. v. Dennison Mfg. Co., 810 F.2d 1561, 1567-68, 1                      
             USPQ2d 1593, 1597 (Fed. Cir. 1987).                                                                     
                    According to appellants, each of the prior art references describes using                        
             Areceptors@ or primary antibodies to bind an analyte of interest.  Brief, page 7.  On the               
             other hand, A[i]n the present invention antibody to folate binding protein binds folate                 
             binding protein which in turn binds analyte (folate).@  Id., page 6.  That is, Athe present             
             invention uses primary antibody to a binding protein to bind the binding protein, not the               




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007