Ex Parte LEE et al - Page 3




             Appeal No. 2005-2385                                                                                    
             Application No. 09/485,045                                                                              
                    conditions with which the protein is associated are disclosed; thus, there is                    
                    no "specific benefit in currently available form" to be derived from                             
                    detection of GDF-16 or inhibition of its activity.                                               
                    With respect to enablement, the examiner argues that “one skilled in the art                     
             clearly would not know how to use the claimed invention” “since the claimed invention is                
             not supported by either a specific or substantial utility.”  Id., page 4.  As evidence of lack          
             of utility and enablement, the examiner puts forth Massagué.  The examiner argues,                      
                    Massagué (Ann. Rev. Biochem., 1998, vol. 67, pp. 753-791) teaches that                           
                    ‘this family comprises a large number of.. . factors, each capable of                            
                    regulating a fascinating array of cellular processes.. .’ (p. 745).  Even                        
                    those family members identified as GDFs have functions as varied as the                          
                    promotion of chondrogenesis and the inhibition of muscle growth (p. 755).                        
                    There is therefore no well-established utility for members of this family;                       
                    they are involved in many different processes and utility is specific to the                     
                    individual protein.                                                                              
             Answer, page 4.                                                                                         
                    On the other hand, appellants argue the utility for the claimed polynucleotide and               
             polypeptide sequence is present in the specification, as filed.  Appellants argue (Brief,               
             page 5)                                                                                                 
                    [t]he specification discloses that GDF-16 is a TGF-beta family member.                           
                    Based on this fact and the known activities of various TGF-beta family                           
                    members, a number of utilities were asserted for GDF-16 encoding                                 
                    polynucleotides, [and] ... are supported by published literature. ...  More                      
                    specifically, the specification discloses that a GDF-16 polynucleotide can                       
                    be utilized in detecting and diagnosing a cell proliferative disorder by                         
                    detecting an altered level of expression compared with that of a normal                          
                    cell (page 19, lines 3-10).  Furthermore, the specification discloses that a                     
                    GDF-16 polynucleotide can be used to detect a close family member of                             
                    GDF-16 (page 7, lines 18-23).                                                                    



                                                         3                                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007