Appeal No. 2005-1344 Page 4
Application No. 08/468,610
GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 10-16, 18, 20, 22 and 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as anticipated by Boardman.
Claims 1-5, 7-23, 55 and 56 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As
evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies on the combination of Boardman,
Sasaki I, Sasaki II, Kunin, Topp, Kitchener, Guthrie, Hancock, Kitamura,
Tokuyama, Kondo, Iimuro, Bruegger, Economy and Jones.
We vacate the rejections of record and remand the application to the
examiner for further consideration.
DISCUSSION
Claim Construction:
While there are four independent claims pending in this appeal, we believe
claims 1 and 16 to be representative of the issues that need to be resolved
before taking any further action on the merits of this application. Accordingly, we
limit our analysis to independent claims 1 and 16.
As we understand it, claim 1 is drawn to a resin-protein/peptide complex
which comprises a resin and a target protein or peptide bound thereto. The claim
requires the resin to comprise (a) a solid support matrix; and (b) a selected
ionizable ligand covalently attached to the matrix. In addition the claim requires:
i) the ionizable ligand to be selected such that the resin is electrostatically
uncharged at a high and a low ionic strength at the pH where the target protein or
peptide is bound to the resin,
ii) the protein or peptide to bind the resin at a pH of 5 to 9,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007