Appeal No. 2004-0290
Application No. 09/742,692
limit our consideration of this appeal to the examiner’s
rejection of claim 1.
We have throughly reviewed each of appellants’ arguments set
forth in the principal and reply briefs on appeal. However, we
are in complete agreement with the examiner that the claimed
subject matter is unpatentable over the cited prior art.
Accordingly, we will sustain the examiner’s rejections for
essentially those reasons expressed in the answer, and we add the
following primarily for emphasis.
There is no dispute that Beggs, having the same assignee as
appellants, discloses an enzymatic bleaching detergent
composition comprising an enzyme having a part capable of
generating a bleaching chemical and which is coupled to a reagent
having a high binding affinity for stains present on fabrics,
including stains caused by tea, blackberry juice and red wine.
As acknowledged by the examiner, Beggs is silent with respect to
the pI of the reagent having high binding affinity for the
stains. However, we agree with the examiner that since Beggs
discloses the same antibodies of bispecific reagents of peptides
and polypeptides as reagents having high binding affinity for the
stains, the reagents would inherently have the same pI as that
recited in claim 1 on appeal. We note that claim 1 does not
-3–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007