Ex Parte Lawton et al - Page 5




              Appeal No.  2005-1593                                                                                    
              Application No. 10/054,647                                                                               
                     Appellants have asserted a characteristic of the isolated polypeptide and its                     
              variants is its ability to bind to an anti-Ehrlichia antibody.   Appellants have the burden to           
              show that the introduction of additional components would materially change the                          
              characteristics of their invention or whether such components are excluded from their                    
              claims.  In re De Lajarte, 337 F.2d 870, 143 USPQ 256 (CCPA 1964).   Appellants have                     
              not met this burden.   Appellants have not shown that whole Ehrlichia proteins                           
              encompassed by the claim scope do not have the ability to bind to an anti-Ehrlichia                      
              antibody, a characteristic of the sequence and sequence variants appellants have                         
              claimed.  Appellants have not recited a specific sensitivity and/or specificity for the                  
              polypeptide of SEQ ID NO:1 in the claims to distinguish the claimed sequence from                        
              whole Erhlichia proteins.                                                                                
                     We decline to import limitations from the specification that are not part of the                  
              claim into the claims before us, as requested by appellants.   The Request for                           
              Reconsideration is denied.                                                                               

                                                   CONCLUSION                                                          
                     Therefore, the request for reconsideration is denied.                                             









                                                          5                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007