Proteomics Examination Yvonne (Bonnie) Eyler Technology Center 1600 Art Unit 1646 (703) 308-6564

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
35 U.S.C. § 112, First Paragraph By: Sheetal S. Patel.
Advertisements

Patenting Antisense Oligonucleotides and Methods
Enablement Issues in the Examination of Antibodies
Written Description: Antibodies Bennett Celsa TC 1600 QAS
1 Types of Vaccines and Patentability Considerations Christina Chan Supervisory Primary Examiner Art Unit 1644 Phone:
Utility and Written Description Steve Kunin Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy Esther Kepplinger Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations.
1 Homology Language Brian R. Stanton Quality Assurance Specialist Technology Center 1600 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (703)
1 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph and the Wands Analysis Remy Yucel, SPE 1636 (571)
Enablement of Method Claims Encompassing the Immunotherapy of Cancer Gary B. Nickol, Ph.D. Supervisory Patent Examiner Art Unit: 1646 United States Patent.
1 35 USC 112, 1 st paragraph enablement Enablement Practice in TC 1600 Deborah Reynolds, SPE
Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors Yvonne (Bonnie) Eyler Technology Center 1600 Art Unit 1646 (703)
“REACH-THROUGH CLAIMS”
1 Biotechnology Partnership Meeting April 17, 2001 James Martinell Senior Level Examiner Technology Center 1600.
Determination of Obviousness Practice Under the Genus-Species Guidelines and In re Ochiai; In re Brouwer Sreeni Padmanabhan & James Wilson Supervisory.
1 Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP) Gary Jones SPE, Technology Center 1600 (703)
Patent Processing – Examination Issues Patent, Trademark, and Copyright - Law and Policy 5-8 November 2007 Amman, Jordan Global Intellectual Property Academy.
Animals and Transgenesis Peter Paras, Jr.. 2 Overview Introduction — Definitions Types of Transgenic Animals — How they are made Examination of Transgenic.
Restriction Practice for Genus Claims Species Claims Linking Claims and Markush Claims Julie Burke QAS/PM TC1600.
Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical Customer Partnership Topic: Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical Customer Partnership Topic: Examining Issues When.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 25, 2008 Patent - Utility.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 28, 2007 Patent - Enablement.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 27, 2008 Patent - Enablement.
Intellectual Property
Patent Overview by Jeff Woller. Why have Patents? Patents make some people rich – but, does that seem like something the government should protect? Do.
Issues in Patenting Proteins Jon P Weber, SPE 1657.
CISC667, F05, Lec24, Liao1 CISC 667 Intro to Bioinformatics (Fall 2005) DNA Microarray, 2d gel, MSMS, yeast 2-hybrid.
Applications of protomic Presented By: Muhammad Rizwan Roll no: Department of Bioinformatics.
Examination Issues: Immunology Yvonne (Bonnie) Eyler Quality Assurance Specialist Technology Center 1600 USPTO (571)
1 Unity of Invention: Biotech Examples TC1600 Special Program Examiner Julie Burke (571)
1 Intellectual Property Protection for Plants in the United States Anne Marie Grünberg Supervisory Patent Examiner Art Units 1661 and 1638.
Stem Cells Peter Paras, Jr.. 2 Overview Introduction — Definitions Types of Stem Cells — Origin Examination of Stem Cell Claims — Statutes — Sample Claims.
Patenting Antibodies in Europe
Utility Requirement in Japan Makoto Ono, Ph.D. Anderson, Mori & Tomotsune Website:
March 2009 Current Status of Biotech Patenting In India Kausalya Santhanam Ph.D Patent Agent USPTO, IPO Confidential.
Broadening the Scope of the Claims in Gene Therapy Applications Deborah Reynolds Detailee, TCPS
Professor Peng  Patent Act (2008) ◦ Promulgated in 1984 ◦ Amended in 1992, 2000, and 2008.
Patenting Interfering RNA
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Technology Center 1600 Michael P. Woodward Unity of Invention: Biotech Examples.
1 Restriction Practice Updates Julie Burke TC1600 Quality Assurance Specialist
Finish up array applications Move on to proteomics Protein microarrays.
1 Written Description Analysis and Capon v. Eshhar Jeffrey Siew Supervisory Patent Examiner AU 1645 USPTO (571)
Patentability of Reach-Through Claims Brian R. Stanton Practice Specialist Technology Center 1600 (703)
Patentability Considerations in the 3-D Structure Arts Patentability Considerations in the 3-D Structure Arts Michael P. Woodward Supervisory Patent Examiner.
Overview Validity of patent hinges on novelty, utility, and non-obviousness Utility generally not an issue Pre-suit investigation focuses on infringement,
Trilateral Project WM4 Report on comparative study on Examination Practice Relating to Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) and Haplotypes. Linda S.
1 Demystifying the Examination of Stem Cell-Related Inventions Remy Yucel, Ph.D. Supervisory Patent Examiner Technology Center 1600 United States Patent.
Examining Claims for Compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112(a): Part II – Enablement Focus on Electrical/Mechanical and Computer/Software-related Claims August.
Vector Claims in Gene Therapy Applications: In vivo vs. In vitro Utilities Deborah Reynolds SPE GAU
Central dogma: the story of life RNA DNA Protein.
Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
Patenting Interfering RNA John LeGuyader – SPE Art Unit 1635 (571)
ANALYSIS OF GENE EXPRESSION DATA. Gene expression data is a high-throughput data type (like DNA and protein sequences) that requires bioinformatic pattern.
How to Claim your Biotech- Based Invention Deborah Reynolds Detailee, TCPS
1 Enablement Issues in Pharmaceutical Claims Joseph K. M c Kane Supervisory Patent Examiner Art Unit Ardin Marschel Supervisory Patent.
Examination Practice in Applications Presenting “Reach-Through Claims” George Elliott Practice Specialist Technology Center 1600
Patents II Disclosure Requirements Class 12 Notes Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2004 Professor Wagner.
1 Utility Guidelines, Homology Claims and Anti-Sense Molecule Claims Drew Hissong, Ph.D. dhissong*sughrue.com Sughrue Mion, PLLC
Ram R. Shukla, Ph.D. SPE AU 1632 & 1634 Technology Center
Lecture 2 Techniques in proteomics By Ms. Shumaila Azam
Patentability Issues and Mechanism Claims
“Proteomics is a science that focuses on the study of proteins: their roles, their structures, their localization, their interactions, and other factors.”
Law 677 | Patent Law | Spring 2003
KEY CONCEPT Entire genomes are sequenced, studied, and compared.
Patents II Disclosure Requirements
KEY CONCEPT Entire genomes are sequenced, studied, and compared.
Stem Cells Peter Paras, Jr.
Diagnostics and Prognostics
Examination Practice in Applications Presenting “Reach-Through Claims”
Examination Issues: Immunology
Presentation transcript:

Proteomics Examination Yvonne (Bonnie) Eyler Technology Center 1600 Art Unit 1646 (703)

What is a Proteome? All the proteins expressed by a genome. “Functional Proteome” = all the proteins produced by a specific cell in a single time frame.

Why is the Proteome Important? It is the proteins within the cell that: –Provide structure –Produce energy –Allow communication –Allow movement –Allow reproduction Proteins provide the structural and functional framework of cellular life

What is Proteomics? Proteomics refers to the systematic analysis of protein profiles of entire cells, tissues, organisms, or species. It represents the protein counterpart to the analysis of gene function.

Proteomics vs Genomics DNA sequence does not predict if the protein is in an active form RNA quantitation does not always reflect corresponding protein levels Multiple proteins can be obtained from each gene (alternative splicing) Genomics cannot predict post-translational modifications and the effects thereof DNA/RNA analysis cannot predict the amount of a gene product made (if and when) DNA/RNA analysis cannot predict events involving multiple genes

Why is Proteomics Important? Identification of proteins in normal and disease conditions –Investigating epidemiology and taxonomy of pathogens –Analysis of drug resistance Identification of pathogenic mechanisms –Reveals gene regulation events involved in disease progression Promise in novel drug discovery via analysis of clinically relevant molecular events Contributes to understanding of gene function

Proteomic Methodologies Analysis of protein expression patterns Analysis of protein Sequence Information Analysis of protein structure/function relationships

Proteomic Methodologies Complex protein mixtures are separated by 2-D gel electrophoresis Then individual proteins are isolated from spots and are identified by using mass spectrometry Individual proteins are sequenced, followed by database searches Bioinformatics

Proteomics Examination

Patentability Patent Statutes –35 USC 101, Utility –35 USC 102, Anticipation –35 USC 103, Obviousness –35 USC 112, 1st Paragraph, enablement –35 USC 112, 1st Paragraph, written description –35 USC 112, 2nd Paragraph

Protein Expression Pattern

Disclosure # 1 The specification discloses 2D gels of proteins present in prostate cancer cell lysates and normal cell lysates. The specification points to several spots indicating proteins expressed in prostate cancer that are not present in normal cells. The specification distinguishes between these protein spots by isoelectric point and molecular weight. No further information is provided.

Example Claim An isolated polypeptide which is diagnostic of prostate cancer, wherein the polypeptide is identified by 2D gel electrophoretic comparison of proteins present in prostatic cancer cells as compared to normal prostatic cells.

Patentability Considerations- Written Description 112 1st paragraph written description –Can one skilled in the art reasonably conclude the inventor had possession of the claimed invention at the time the application was filed?

Satisfying Written Description –Weigh factual considerations in view of level of skill and knowledge in the art Complete or partial structure Physical and/or chemical properties Functional characteristics Correlation between structure and function Method of making Combinations of the above

Written Description Analysis No structure of the polypeptide is provided in the specification Physical properties of the polypeptide are disclosed, ie molecular weight and pI The biological function of the polypeptide is not disclosed Method of making is not disclosed, only a method of isolating from a specific population of undefined cells. An isolated polypeptide which is diagnostic of prostate cancer, wherein the polypeptide is identified by 2D gel electrophoretic comparison of proteins present in prostatic cancer cells as compared to normal prostatic cells.

Conclusion Applicant was not in possession of the claimed isolated polypeptide.

Solution Claim a method of diagnosing prostate cancer that relies upon a particular pattern of polypeptide expression.

The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Patentability Considerations- Enablement

Factors to be considered, In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 8 USPQ 2d 1400 (Fed. Cir. 1988) Quantity of experimentation necessary Amount of direction or guidance presented Presence or absence of working examples Nature of the invention State of the prior art Relative skill of those in the art Predictability or unpredictability of the art Breadth of the claims

Enablement Analysis Undue experimentation necessary to isolate and identify polypeptide. No guidance present regarding the structure of the polypeptide. No working examples of isolated polypeptide used to diagnose prostate cancer. The prior art does not teach polypeptide or it’s use to diagnose prostate cancer. The structure and function isolated polypeptide is unpredictable from the disclosure. An isolated polypeptide which is diagnostic of prostate cancer, wherein the polypeptide is identified by 2D gel electrophoretic comparison of proteins present in prostatic cancer cells as compared to normal prostatic cells.

Conclusion Specification was not enabling for the claimed isolated polypeptide.

Solution Claim a method of diagnosing prostate cancer that relies upon a particular pattern of polypeptide expression.

Patentability Considerations- Utility Asserted utility –specific –substantial –credible Well established utility

Utility Analysis The asserted utility is to use the polypeptide to diagnose prostate cancer The asserted utility is specific The asserted utility is substantial The asserted utility is credible An isolated polypeptide which is diagnostic of prostate cancer, wherein the polypeptide is identified by 2D gel electrophoretic comparison of proteins present in prostatic cancer cells as compared to normal prostatic cells.

Conclusion The claimed invention has a specific, substantial, and credible asserted utility, i.e. for cancer diagnosis.

Disclosure # 2 The specification discloses 2D gels of prostate cancer and normal cell lysates. A polypeptide located in a spot unique to prostate cancer cells was isolated and sequenced (SEQ ID NO: 1) Antibodies were generated to SEQ ID NO: 1 The antibodies were used in a series of binding assays to demonstrate a clear correlation between presence of high levels of SEQ ID NO: 1 and prostate cancer.

An Example Claim Set An isolated polypeptide comprising at least 10 contiguous amino acids of SEQ ID NO: 1. An isolated polypeptide having at least 45% identity to the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 1.

Satisfying Written Description –Weigh factual considerations in view of level of skill and knowledge in the art Complete or partial structure Physical and/or chemical properties Functional characteristics Correlation between structure and function Method of making Combinations of the above

Written Description Analysis Physical properties of a single polypeptide are disclosed, ie molecular weight and pI by 2D gel electrophoresis and its sequence. The physical properties of polypeptides comprising 10 amino acids or of polypeptides having 45% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1 are not disclosed or known in the art. No biological function of the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 1 is disclosed. The isolated polypeptide is an “orphan” receptor. No structural to functional correlation is disclosed between core structural features needed to retain function in the two claimed genus of polypeptides. An isolated polypeptide comprising at least 10 contiguous amino acids of SEQ ID NO: 1. An isolated polypeptide having at least 45% identity to the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 1.

Conclusion Applicant was not in possession of the claimed genus of isolated polypeptides.

Satisfying the Enablement Requirement Factors to be considered, In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 8 USPQ 2d 1400 (Fed. Cir. 1988)Factors to be considered, In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 8 USPQ 2d 1400 (Fed. Cir. 1988) Quantity of experimentation necessary Amount of direction or guidance presented Presence or absence of working examples Nature of the invention State of the prior art Relative skill of those in the art Predictability or unpredictability of the art Breadth of the claims

Enablement Analysis No guidance regarding the critical structural features of the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 1. –Which 10 amino acids are essential to functional and physical properties? –Where over the length of the polypeptide may changes be made up to 45% identity and still retain functional and physical properties? There is no function for the isolated polypeptide. It is an “orphan” receptor. It is not predictable that the scope of the claimed polypeptides could be used to diagnose prostate cancer. An isolated polypeptide comprising at least 10 contiguous amino acids of SEQ ID NO: 1. An isolated polypeptide having at least 45% identity to the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 1.

Conclusion The specification was not enabling for the scope the claimed isolated polypeptides.

Solution Claim: An isolated polypeptide comprising SEQ ID NO: 1.

??? Questions ???