Interference No. 104,717 Paper 30
Laudano v. Dana-Farber Cancer Inst., Inc. Page 2
FACTS
The following facts are supported by at least a preponderance of the evidence:
[1] There are three counts in the interference, counts 4, 6, and 7:
Count 4: Isolated antibody that specifically binds to a reversible tyrosine
phosphorylation site of a reversibly phosphorylated protein in its phosphorylated
isoform and does not bind to the non-phosphorylated isoform of said protein, nor
to proteins other than said protein.
Count 6: Isolated antibody that specifically binds to a reversible phosphorylation
site of the c-erbB-2 receptor in its active form and does not bind to the inactive
form of said c-erbB-2 receptor, nor to proteins other than said c-erbB-2 receptor.
Count 7: Isolated antibody that specifically binds to a reversible serine or
threonine phosphorylation site of a reversibly phosphorylated protein in its
phosphorylated isoform and does not bind to the non-phosphorylated isoform of
said protein, nor to proteins other than said protein.
[2] The claims corresponding to these counts1 are:
Total claims Count 4 Count 6 Count 7 Not involved
Laudano 38-44 and 47-69 38, 39, 47-53, 59- 38-41, 47-55, 42, 43, 47, 51,
64, 66, 67, and 69 and 59-69 56, and 57 44 and 58
1-6, 8, 10-12, 14, 1-6, 8, 10, 13,
DFCI 1-33 18, 20-28, and 14, 16-18, 20- 1, 7, 9, and 29 15 and 19
30-32 28, 30 and 33
[3] The parties also refer to two non-existent counts, counts 3 and 5, for purposes of illustration, but
acknowledge that these counts are not really counts in this interference (Paper 27 at Fact 1 and
n.1):
Count 3: Isolated antiphosphopeptide antibodies that specifically bind to a
protein containing said phosphopeptide, but not specific for the corresponding
1 A claim can correspond to more than one count if the claim is broad enough to have been anticipated or
rendered obvious by the separate inventions described in more than one count.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007