Ex Parte SHEPARD et al - Page 3




                     Appeal No. 1999-1433                                                                                                                                              
                     Application 08/453,852                                                                                                                                            
                     Bachwich et al. (Bachwich), “Tumor Necrosis Factor Stimulates Interleukin-1 and                                                                                   
                     Prostaglandin E2 Production In Resting Macrophages,” Biochemical and Biophysical                                                                                  
                     Research Communications, Vol. 136, pp. 94-101 (1986).                                                                                                             
                     Kornbluth et al. (Kornbluth), “Tumor Necrosis Factor Production by Human Monocytes                                                                                
                     is a Regulated event: Induction of TNF-"-Mediated Cellular Cytotoxicity by Endotoxin”,                                                                            
                     J. Immunology, Vol. 137, pp. 2585-2591 (1986).                                                                                                                    
                                The claims stand rejected as follows:                                                                                                                  
                     I.         Claims 1, 2, 4, 5 and 14 stand rejected under the judicially-created doctrine of                                                                       
                     obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 and 8 of U.S.                                                                             
                     Patent No. 4,963,354.                                                                                                                                             
                     II.        Claims 5 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as                                                                               
                     “containing subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as                                                                          
                     to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time                                                                         
                     the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.”  Answer, pp. 4-5.                                                                            
                     III.       Claims 1 and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as being                                                                         
                     based on a non-enabling disclosure.                                                                                                                               
                     IV.        Claims 1, 2, 4, and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                                                                                   
                     unpatentable over Kato and Beutler or Kornbluth.                                                                                                                  
                     V.         Claims 1, 2, 4, and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                                                                                   
                     unpatentable over Staruch and Bachwich.                                                                                                                           
                     VI.        Claims 3, 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                                                                           
                     over Kato and Beutler or Kornbluth, in further view of Riggs.                                                                                                     



                                                                                          3                                                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007