Ex Parte Reddy et al - Page 1



                      UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                               
                                                __________                                                    
                            BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                
                                         AND INTERFERENCES                                                    
                                                __________                                                    
                         Ex parte SANJAY M. REDDY, BLANCA M. LUPIANI,                                         
                                        and RICHARD L. WITTER                                                 
                                             Appeal 2007-2542                                                 
                                           Application 10/623,891                                             
                                          Technology Center 1600                                              
                                                __________                                                    
                                         Decided:  October 26, 2007                                           
                                                __________                                                    
                Before, ERIC GRIMES, LORA M. GREEN, and RICHARD M.                                            
                LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                       
                LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                        
                                         DECISION ON APPEAL                                                   
                      This is a decision on appeal from the Examiner’s final rejection of                     
                claims 1-3, 5-10, and 12-15.  We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).                    
                We affirm.                                                                                    
                                       STATEMENT OF THE CASE                                                  
                      The claimed invention relates to vaccines to protect chickens against                   
                infection with Marek’s disease virus (Specification 1: ¶ 1).  “Marek’s                        
                disease (MD), a highly prevalent and important lymphoproliferative disease                    
                of chickens, is controlled in commercial chickens by live virus vaccines                      
                consisting of attenuated or naturally avirulent MD-related herpesviruses”                     
                (Specification 1: ¶ 2).  “Although vaccination programs have been                             




Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013