Appeal No. 2007-0534
Application No. 10/463,016
(c) contacting the first and second fusion proteins under conditions in which the
anchor component and the docking domain bind wherein the binding affinity of
the binding partners is at least 1 µM and the binding of the docking domain and
the anchor component brings the variable component and active domain into
spatial proximity to allow modulation of the active domain; and
(d) determining an activity of the active domain in the presence relative to the
absence of the first fusion protein, wherein an increase or decrease in the activity
of the active domain in the presence relative to the absence of the first fusion
protein indicates that the variable component of the first fusion protein is a
modulator of the active domain.
The prior art cited by the examiner is:
Hamilton et al. (Hamilton) 6,780,599 Aug. 24, 2004
Silver et al. (Silver) WO 01/55452 Aug. 2, 2001
Grounds of Rejection
Claims 1, 2, 5, 7-11, 15, 16, and 27-31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
first paragraph for failing to comply with the written description requirement.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 7-11, 15, 16, and 27-31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
over Silver.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 7-11, 15, 16, and 27-31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
over Hamilton.
We reverse the written description rejection and affirm the obviousness
rejections.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013