Appeal 2007-2400
Application 10/418,182
2. REFERENCES
The Examiner relies on the following references:
Crea US 5,830,650 Nov. 3, 1998
Crea US S.N. 10/371,404 Feb. 20, 2003
Crea US 6,649,340 B1 Nov. 18, 2003
Victoria A. Roberts et al., “Antibody Remodeling: A General
Solution to the Design of a Metal-Coordination Site in an Antibody Binding
Pocket”, 87(17) Proc. Nat’l Acad. Sci. USA 6654-6658 (1990).
3. PROVISIONAL OBVIOUSNESS-TYPE DOUBLE PATENTING
Claims 1-9 stand provisionally rejected for obviousness-type double
patenting as being not patentably distinct from claims 32-39 of application
10/371,404 (Answer 4).
Appellant “reserves response on this matter until the time when claims
are allowed in the copending application. No terminal disclaimer has been
filed at this time.” (Reply Br. 2.)
Since Appellant has provided no basis on which to conclude that the
provisional rejection is improper, we affirm it.
4. OBVIOUSNESS-TYPE DOUBLE PATENTING
Claims 1-9 stand rejected for obviousness-type double patenting as
being not patentably distinct from claim 1 of U.S. Patent 6,649,340 (Answer
4). The Examiner reasons that the instant claims are not patentably distinct
from the patented claim “because the broad claimed library having
undefined predetermined amino acid encompasses the library of the ‘340
which similarly teaches the subset library wherein the predetermined amino
acid is defined” (Answer 4).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013