The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for
publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 69
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte HUBERT J. P. SCHOEMAKER, and RICHARD A. CARRANO
__________
Appeal No. 1999-1434
Application No. 08/307,044
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before ADAMS, MILLS, GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judges.
GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
An oral hearing in this case was scheduled for February 5, 2002. Upon
reviewing the case, however, we have determined that an oral hearing will not be
necessary and we render the following decision based on the record.
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the examiner’s
final rejection of claims 12-15, 19, 20, 22-24, and 27-34, all of the claims
remaining. Claim 12 is representative and reads as follows:
12. A method for treating a gastrointestinal tumor comprising
administering to a patient afflicted with a gastrointestinal
tumor, a murine monoclonal antibody which specifically
binds to an epitope of 17-1A antigen, said antibody being
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007