Appeal 2006-3288
Application 10/316,761
The Examiner relies on the following prior art references to show
unpatentability:
Iovanna U.S. 5,436,169 Jul. 25, 1995
Queen U.S. 5,530,101 Jun. 25, 1996
The amino acid sequence of PAP-2 is represented by SEQ ID NO:1.
SEQ ID NO:1 is a 175 amino acid sequence representing both the “secretory
(ie., the signal peptide is cleaved; E27-D175 of SEQ ID NO:1) and non-
secretory (i.e., signal peptide remains) forms of . . . human PAP-2 as well as
any proteolytic fragments thereof” (Specification 4: 10-20).
According to the Specification, “[t]he terms ‘specific binding’ or
‘specifically binding’, as used herein, in reference to the interaction of an
antibody and a protein or peptide, mean that the interaction is dependent
upon the presence of a particular structure (i.e., the antigenic determinant or
epitope) on the protein; in other words, the antibody is recognizing and
binding to a specific protein structure rather than to proteins in general” (id.
at 13: 14-18).
ANTICIPATION
Claims 11, 32, 34, 42, and 43 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Iovanna.
“[I]n an ex parte proceeding to obtain a patent, . . . the Patent Office
has the initial burden of coming forward with some sort of evidence tending
to disprove novelty.” See In re Wilder, 429 F.2d 447, 450, 166 USPQ 545,
548 (CCPA 1970). Nevertheless, “when the PTO shows sound basis for
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013