Appeal No. 1999-1433 Application 08/453,852 saponin, alum and the like.” Id., col. 7, lines 20-24. Here, we direct attention to our discussions above wherein we hold that the examiner has not met her burden of establishing that the inventions described in claims 1, 2, 4 and 14 would have been obvious in view of the teachings of Kato, Beutler, Staruch and Bachwich. Thus, we agree with the appellants that the teachings of Riggs and Cohen do not rectify the deficiencies of the primary references. Accordingly, Rejections VI-IX are reversed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). AFFIRMED-IN-PART JOAN ELLIS ) Administrative Patent Judge ) ) ) ) ) BOARD OF PATENT TONI R. SCHEINER ) APPEALS Administrative Patent Judge ) AND ) INTERFERENCES ) ) ) LORA GREEN ) Administrative Patent Judge ) Genentech, Inc. Diane L. Marschang 14Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007