Ex Parte Ilsley et al - Page 6


             Appeal No. 2006-1547                                                              Page 6                
             Application No. 10/114,668                                                                              

                    A specification must conclude with claims “particularly pointing out and distinctly              
             claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.”  35 U.S.C.                   
             §112, ¶ 2 (2000).  The purpose of 35 U.S.C. §112,  ¶ 2, is to “reasonably apprise those                 
             skilled in the art of the scope of the invention.” Miles Labs., Inc. v. Shandon, Inc.,                  
             997 F.2d 870, 875, 27 USPQ2d 1123, 1126 (Fed. Cir. 1993).  In examining the claims of                   
             an application, the PTO is permitted to “adopt the broadest reasonable meaning of the                   
             words in their ordinary usage as they would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the               
             art, taking into account whatever enlightenment by way of definitions or otherwise that                 
             may be afforded by the written description contained in the applicant's specification.”                 
             In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027  (Fed.Cir.1997); In re Crish,                   
             393 F.3d 1253, 1256, 73 USPQ2d 1364, 1367 (Fed.Cir. 2004).                                              
                    Claim 1 requires a DNA primer composition that comprises a “pulse-jet deposited                  
             polymerase.”  “Pulse-jet deposited” has been construed to define the method (“pulse-                    
             jet”) by which the polymerase is immobilized (“deposited”) on the surface of the solid                  
             support.   It is a meaningful limitation since it would localize the polymerase to a discrete           
             region on the solid support by virtue of the jet-pulse process.  See, Specification, ¶ 26.              
             The polymerase is not imbued with any additional distinguishing features, other than it                 
             possess “template dependent primer extension” polymerase activity as expressly                          
             recited in the claim.  Our construction relies on both the ordinary usage of the phrase                 
             and the written description which describes the use of pulse jet deposition protocols to                
             immobilize DNA polymerase.  Id., page 27, B.  The construction is consistent with the                   
             structure of independent claims 1 and 19 which require the “pulse-jet deposited                         
             polymerase” to be a component of the “DNA primer composition” which, itself, is                         





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007