Ex Parte Barbera-Guillem - Page 1




                         The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written          
                                for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.                   

                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                              
                                                __________                                                   
                           BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                
                                        AND INTERFERENCES                                                    
                                                __________                                                   
                                    Ex parte EMILIO BARBERA-GUILLEM                                          
                                                __________                                                   
                                           Appeal No. 2006-2466                                              
                                         Application No. 09/835,759                                          
                                                __________                                                   
                                                 ON BRIEF                                                    
                                                __________                                                   
            Before ADAMS, GRIMES, and LINCK, Administrative Patent Judges.                                   
            GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                             

                                          DECISION ON APPEAL                                                 
                   This appeal involves claims to compositions comprising a tumor-associated                 
            antigen and a component that depletes B cells.  The examiner has rejected the claims             
            as anticipated and obvious.  We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 134.  We affirm the          
            obviousness rejection and reverse the anticipation rejection.                                    
                                                Background                                                   
                   “Primarily, there are two subsets of [CD4+ lymphocytes], TH1 cells and TH2                
            cells.”  Specification, page 1.  TH1 cells “are generally accepted as being integral for         
            cell mediated immunity” and TH2 cells “support a humoral immune response.”                       
            Id., pages 1-2.                                                                                  







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

Last modified: November 3, 2007