Appeal No. 2006-0632 Παγε 5
Application No. 09/929,665
Much has been said on both sides of this issue, but we agree with appellant that
the specification describes the disputed subgenus of antibodies, and that this “is not a
close case” (Reply Brief, page 1). The specification describes “a biological agent that
recognizes an extracellular domain of prostate specific membrane antigen”
(Specification, page 11). “Preferred isolated biological agents which recognize an
extracellular domain of prostate specific membrane antigen . . . are isolated antibodies
or binding portions thereof, probes or ligands” (id.). The specification further describes
four “particularly preferred” monoclonal antibodies which bind the extracellular domain
of PSMA (id., page 19). Three of the antibodies, J591, J533, and E99, “interfere,
compete, or block binding of one another” to the same epitope on PSMA, but “do not
block binding of [the fourth antibody,] J415[,] and vice versa” (id., page 38). Moreover,
the specification teaches that “[s]uitable probes or ligands are molecules which bind to
the . . . antigens identified by the monoclonal antibodies of the present invention” (id.,
page 19), i.e., molecules which bind the same epitopes identified by J591, J533, E99
and J415.
Thus, the specification explicitly describes both competing and non-competing
antibodies, and also teaches that other biological agents that bind, or recognize, the
same sites identified by J591, J533, E99 and J415 are suitable for use in the various
methods outlined in the specification. While it is true that the specification does not
explicitly state that other antibodies are included among suitable “molecules which bind
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007