Appeal No. 2006-0102 Page 10
Application No. 09/732,439
genus of recombinant DNA segments that encode enzymes that catalyze the
synthesis of proline and would be capable of being “expressed in a plant in an
amount effective to confer tolerance or resistance to a reduction in water
availability” as encompassed by claim 59. In this regard, we find that the
evidence of record establishes that as of appellants’ filing date three distinct
pathways were known to exist for the production of proline. See e.g., Verma I,
figure 4. The references relied upon by appellants teach the enzymes involved in
the plant pathway:
Glutamate GSA P5C Proline
P5CS P5CR
While the P5CR enzyme taught by the evidence of record is involved in
the last step (P5C → Proline) of the proline biosynthetic pathway in bacteria -
bacteria utilize two separate enzymes (γGK and GSD) to convert glutamate to
GSA as opposed to the single P5CS bifunctional enzyme utilized by plants. Id.,
and column 3, lines 41-58. Appellants fail to direct our attention to any evidence
of record, and we find none, that teaches the enzymes involved in the third
pathway for proline biosynthesis, which involves the intermediate ornithine.
Verma I, figure 4.
Therefore, as we understand the evidence of record, while there are three
separate pathways for the biosynthesis of proline, which appear to utilize a
number of different enzymes, appellants would assert that the knowledge in the
art of P5CS and P5CR is representative of the entire genus of enzymes involved
in proline biosynthesis. We disagree.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007