Ex Parte Digan et al - Page 3

                Appeal 2007-1633                                                                             
                Application 09/480,236                                                                       
                      The Examiner relies on the following prior art references to show                      
                unpatentability:                                                                             
                Neville   6,103,235   Aug. 15, 2000                                                          
                Kreitman, R.J., et al., Recombinant Single-Chain Immunotoxins Against T                      
                and B Cell Leukemias, 13 Leukemia and Lymphoma 1-10 (1994).                                  
                Kussie, P.H., et al., A Single Engineered Amino Acid Substitution Changes                    
                Antibody Fine Specificity, 152 J. Immunology 146-152 (1994).                                 
                Chen, C., et al., Enhancement and destruction of antibody function by                        
                somatic mutation: unequal occurrence is controlled by V gene combinatorial                   
                associations, 14(12) The EMBO J. 2784-2794 (1995).                                           
                Kreitman, R.J., et al., Targeting Pseudomonas exotoxin to hematologic                        
                malignancies, 6 Cancer Biology 297-306 (1995).                                               

                      The rejections as presented by the Examiner are as follows:                            
                1.  Claims 51-53 stand rejected under the written description provision of                   
                35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.                                                            
                2.  Claims 50 and 51 stand rejected under the enablement provision                           
                35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.                                                            
                3.  Claims 35-54 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable                     
                over the combination of Neville, Kreitman ’95 and Kreitman ’94.                              
                      We affirm.                                                                             

                                               DISCUSSION                                                    
                Written Description:                                                                         
                      Claims 51-53 stand rejected under the written description provision of                 
                35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.  The Examiner finds that “[t]here is                       
                insufficient written description to show that Appellant [sic] was in                         

                                                     3                                                       

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

Last modified: September 9, 2013