The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte GARY L. GRIFFITHS
___________
Appeal No. 2004-1660
Application No. 10/071,247
__________
HEARD: December 9, 2004
__________
Before WILLIAM F. SMITH, SCHEINER and GRIMES, 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 9-12 and 16-20. Claims 13-15, also pending, have been objected to.
Claim 9 is representative:
9. A method for detecting a tissue comprising:
(a) administering to a patient a bispecific antibody or antibody fragment
comprising an arm that is specific to a target tissue of the patient and another arm that
is specific to an F-18-labeled peptide or a low molecular weight hapten conjugated to
the F-18-labeled peptide; and allowing the bispecific antibody or antibody fragment to
bind to the target tissue, and the non-targeted bispecific antibody or antibody fragment
to clear;
(b) administering the F-18-labeled peptide or the hapten conjugate thereof to the
patient, and allowing the F-18-labeled peptide or the hapten conjugate thereof to bind to
the bispecific antibody or the antibody fragment, and the unbound F-18-labeled peptide
or hapten conjugate thereof to clear; and
(c) detecting the F-18-labeled peptide, thereby detecting the target tissue.
Claims 9-12 and 16-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as
lacking both enablement and adequate written description. We will reverse both of
these rejections.
BACKGROUND
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007