Appeal No. 2002-0796 Page 5
Application No. 09/110,994
Petrenko is cited by the rejection for teaching a method of screening a
ligand, i.e., dioxin, and identifying peptides that bind to it through the use of a
peptide library. As noted by the rejection, the peptide library of Petrenko is a
phage display library, wherein random octapeptides are generated at the end of
the major phage coat protein. The rejection acknowledges that “Petrenko does
not recite identifying protein(s) which contain the portion of the translated peptide
sequences or proteins which correspond to a consensus peptide (motif)
sequences of said translated library member peptide sequences, by statistical
analysis as recited.” Examiner’s Answer, pages 4-5.
Ivanenkov is cited by the rejection for teaching that “method[s] of
identifying a protein from a peptide containing a consensus sequence or motif by
statistical analysis i.e., comparison of consensus peptide sequence(s) obtained
from a phage random library with the peptide structures present in a protein
sequence databank, specifically Gen Bank, is conventionally done in the art.”
Ivanenkov is also cited for teaching that using random peptide libraries “provides
a rapid means to identify target epitopes for a specific protein, for which there is
only limited information regarding its interactions, and raises the possibility that
this approach may be a broadly applicable method.” Id. at 5.
Sparks is cited by the rejection for teaching “a method of screening cDNA
libraries for ligand which allows for the identification of highly disparate protein
sequences possessing equivalent functional activities,” and that “the ability to
isolate entire repertoires of proteins containing particular modular domains will
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007