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for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.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. 68
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte ROBERT WEINBERG, CLIFFORD TABIN
and SCOTT BRADLEY
___________
Appeal No. 2003-0054
Application No. 08/308,193
__________
HEARD: April 15, 2003
__________
Before WILLIAM F. SMITH, LORIN and SCHEINER, Administrative Patent Judges.
SCHEINER, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final rejection of
claims 93, 99 and 100. Claims 95 and 97, the only other claims pending at the time of
the final rejection, have been canceled by an amendment under 37 CFR § 1.116 filed
with appellant’s Brief (paper no. 62). Claims 93, 99 and 100 read as follows:
93. A nucleic acid probe capable of detecting a single base difference between
a nucleotide sequence present in a previously isolated oncogene and a nucleotide
sequence present in a corresponding previously isolated proto-oncogene, wherein the
single base difference is responsible for conversion of the proto-oncogene to the
oncogene and the single base difference is located in a sequence recognized by a
restriction enzyme.
99. The probe of claim 93, wherein the oncogene is a human ras oncogene.
100. The probe of claim 93, wherein the human ras oncogene differs from the
human ras proto-oncogene in the codon for position 12.
Claims 93, 99 and 100 stand rejected under the doctrine of obviousness-type
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007