Ex Parte Walker et al - Page 7

                Appeal 2007-1032                                                                               
                Application 10/062,920                                                                         

                without ‘undue experimentation.’”  In re Wright, 999 F.2d 1557, 1561, 27                       
                USPQ2d 1510, 1513 (Fed. Cir. 1993).  However, “[t]he scope of enablement                       
                . . . is that which is disclosed in the specification plus the scope of what                   
                would be known to one of ordinary skill without undue experimentation.”                        
                National Recovery Technols. Inc. v. Magnetic Separation Sys., Inc., 166                        
                F.3d 1228, 1232, 49 USPQ2d 1671, 1675-76 (Fed Cir. 1999).                                      
                      Moreover, a claim does not lack enablement merely because it                             
                encompasses inoperative embodiments.  Atlas Powder Co. v. E.I. DuPont De                       
                Nemours & Co., 750 F.2d 1569, 1576, 224 USPQ 409, 414 (Fed. Cir. 1984).                        
                Thus, claims to a method do not lack enablement merely because a difficult-                    
                to-achieve outcome is encompassed, but not required, by the claims.  See In                    
                re Cortright, 165 F.3d 1353, 1359, 49 USPQ2d 1464, 1468 (Fed. Cir. 1999)                       
                (claims encompassing achieving full head of hair held enabled by evidence                      
                showing three-fold increase in hair number, filling-in, and fuzz).                             
                      We agree that the claims encompass inhibiting infection by E. canis.                     
                All that they require, however, is inducing some degree of immune                              
                response, such as generating antibodies.                                                       
                      The Specification provides the amino acid sequences of the proteins                      
                recited in the claims.  One of the claimed proteins has been demonstrated to                   
                react with antiserum from a previously infected dog (Specification 42;                         
                Figure 2), thus suggesting that it would elicit an immune response in a                        
                subject.  The Specification discloses that all of the proteins recited in the                  
                claims “are homologous to the omp-1 multiple gene family of E.                                 
                chaffeensis” (Specification 50:11-12), and that this “family of homologous                     
                genes encoding outer membrane proteins with molecular masses of 28-kDa                         


                                                      7                                                        

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013