Appeal No. 2004-1106 July 2004
Application 09/871,388 Page 2
rejection of claims 14-21 and 23-33. Claim 22, the only other claim pending in this
application, has been indicated as allowable.3 We affirm.
Claims 14-21 and 23-33 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph,
as lacking original descriptive support.
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants' specification and claims and to the respective positions articulated by
the appellants and the examiner. We make reference to the EXAMINER'S ANSWER
("Answer," mailed 6 August 2003) for the examiner's reasoning in support of the
rejection and to appellant's BRIEF ON APPEAL ("Brief," filed 12 May 2003) and REPLY
BRIEF ON APPEAL ("Reply," filed 22 September 2003) for appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
Appellants state "all the claims stand as a group" (Brief, p. 2). We, therefore,
limit our discussion to claim 14. 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7).
II. Findings of fact
The following facts are supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
A. KUZ and MADM proteins
1. According to appellants' specification, KUZ refers to a family of proteins
encoded by a "new" gene family kuzbanian (kuz) which belong to the recently defined
ADAM family of transmembrane proteins, members of which contain both A Disintegrin
And Metalloprotease domains (p. 2, ll. 6-13).4
3 See e.g., Final Office Action (issued 11 March 2003, Paper 10), p. 2.
4 Italics are used herein to refer to a gene, whereas capitals are used to refer to a protein. Thus,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007