Appeal No. 2003-0554 Page 5
Application No. 09/575,554
an 8 nucleobase portion of appellants’ SEQ ID NO: 26 (#26), shaded regions
indicate mismatches:
Bos 12: G T T G G A G C T A G T G G C G T A G G
#26: C A A C C T C G A C C A C C G C A T C C G
Bos also discloses (column 4, line 43) a sequence for an oligonucleotide directed
at the codon encoding amino acid 61 (Bos 61) which is complementary to at
least an 8 nucleobase portion of appellants’ SEQ ID NO: 28 (#28), shaded
regions indicate mismatches:
Bos 61: A C A G C A G G T G A A G A G G A G T A
#28: T G T C G T C C A C T T C T C C T C A T G
The examiner, however, offers no evidence or explanation as to why the prior art
of record would have led a person of ordinary skill to select an oligonucleotide
complementary to the oligonucleotides disclosed by Bos to be “complementary
to a DNA sequence encoding a mutant K-ras protein.” Bos, column 4, lines 26-
31, and lines 38-42.
For the foregoing reasons, we are compelled to reverse the rejection of
claims 1 and 7-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the combination of Bos, Daaka,
Hall and Saison-Behmoaras, Uhlmann, Agrawal, Inoue and Smith.
OTHER ISSUES
Prior to any further prosecution, we encourage the examiner to consider
the effect, if any, that Bos et al., United States Patent No. 5,591,582 (‘5823) may
have on appellants’ claimed invention. The ‘582 patent appears to be available
prior art with an effective filing date through two continuation applications to
3 A copy of the ‘582 patent is included with our decision.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007