Antibodies that immunospecifically bind to B lymphocyte stimulator protein

Eli Lilly letter on Statement on Grounds of Appeal filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on May 1, 2009).

HGS Press Release, “Human Genome Sciences and GlaxoSmitl1Kline Announce Positive Phase 3 Study Results for BenlystaTM” (Jul. 20, 2009).

Declaration of Amy Hamilton filed in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Jul. 23, 2009).

Eli Lilly letter to Technical Board of Appeals regarding Response to Appeal in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Jul. 23, 2009).

Eli Lilly Response to Appeal filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Jul. 23, 2009).

Declaration and Curriculum Vitae of Dr. Thomas Lane Rothstein filed in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Jul. 27, 2009).

Second Declaration of Dr. John Calley filed in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Jul. 27, 2009).

Signed Declaration of Dr. Thomas Lane Rotl1stein filed in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Jul. 27,2009).

HGS letter on Grounds of Appeal update filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Jul. 31, 2009).

Preliminary Opinion of tl1e Board of Appeal in Appeal Case T 18/093.3.08 in EP Patent 0939804 (Aug. 24, 2009).

Auxiliary Requestl filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Auxiliary Request II filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Auxiliary Request III filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Auxiliary Request IV filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Auxiliary Request V filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Eli Lilly Reply to Preliminary Opinion filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Further Declaration of Dr. John Calley filed in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

HGS Reply to Preliminary Opinion filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Main Request filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Second Declaration of Dr. Garnett Herrel Kelsoe III and list of annexes filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Second Declaration of Dr. Randolph J . Noelle filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Second Declaration of Dr. Stuart Farrow filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Summary of Respondent’s Proposed Experiments filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Third Declaration of Dr. Andrew Martin and Appendix 1 filed before Technical Board of Appeals in Opposition of EP Patent No. 0 939 804 (Filed in the European Patent Office on Sep. 30, 2009).

Minutes of the Oral Proceedings before the Opposition Division, issued by the European Patent Office in the matter of Eli Lilly’s Opposition of EP 0 939 804 (Oct. 26, 2009).

Eli Lilly’s Skeleton Argument on appeal in UK Revocation suit HC06CO2687 (Oct. 30, 2009).

Human Genome Science’s Consolidated Skeleton Argument on appeal in UK Revocation suit HC06CO2687 (Dec. 2009).

Eli Lilly’s Note on the Decision oftl1e TBA in T18/09 in UK Revocation suit HC06CO2687 (Dec. 4, 2009).

Eli Lilly’ s Note on why the Decision of tl1e TBA in T 1 8/ 09 is different on the Facts in UK Revocation suit HC06CO2687 (Dec. 11, 2009). Human Genome Science’s mark-up of Eli Lilly’s Note on why the Decision of the TBA in T18/09 is different on the Facts in UK Revocation suit HC06CO2687 (Dec. 11, 2009).

Human Genome Science’s Note on why the Invention is susceptible of Industrial Application in UK Revocation suit HC06CO2687 (Dec. 10, 2009).

Human Genome Science’s Note on paragraph 26 of Judgment by Mr Justice Kitchin in UK Revocation suit HC06CO2687 (Dec. 2009). Human Genome Science’s Reply Note in UK Revocation suit HC06CO2687 (Dec. 11, 2009).

Approved Judgment by Mr Justice Jacob on appeal from the Chancery Division in UK Revocation suit HC06CO2687 (Feb. 9, 2010). Notification of decision of tl1e Technical Board of Appeals in Appeal Case T 18/09-3.3.08 in EP Patent 0 939 804 (Oct. 21, 2009). “Classification Criteria for the Diagnosis of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus,” retrieved Jul. 22, 2010 from http://medicalcriteria. com/criteria/slehtm.

Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/210,134, dated Jul. 21, 2010.

El-Hallak et al., J Pediatr., “Clinical Effects and Safety of Rituximab for Treatment of Refractory Pediatric Autoimmune Diseases,” 150:376-382 (2007).

Tan et al., Arthritis Rheum., “Range of antinuclear antibodies in “healthy” individuals,” 40(9): 1601- 16 11 (1997).

Petri et al., N. Engl. J Med., “Combined Oral Contraceptives in Women with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus,” 353(24):2550-2558 (2005).

Sauge-Merle et al., Eu/". J Biochem., “An active ribonucleotide reductase from Arabidopsis thaliana: cloning, expression and characterization of the large subunit,” 266:62-69 (1999).

Esposito et al., J Immunol., “Human transaldolase and cross-reactive viral epitopes identified by autoantibodies of multiple sclerosis patients,” 163:4027-4032 (1999).

International Search Report issued in PCT Application No. PCT/ US01/25850, dated Apr. 1,2003.

International Search Report issued in PCT Application No. PCT/ US01/25891, dated Apr. 2, 2003.

Requirement for Restriction/Election issued in U.S. Appl. No. 09/932,322, dated Jun. 30, 2004.

Non-Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 09/932,322, dated Feb. 9, 2005.

Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 09/932,322, dated Aug. 24, 2005.

Notice ofAllowance issued in U.S. Appl. No. 09/932,322, dated Feb. 8, 2006.

Han et al., “Characterization of Transformation Function of Cottontail Rabbit Papillomavirus E5 and E8 Genes,” I/lrology, 251:253-263 (1998).

Non-Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/135,025, datedAug. 4, 2010.

Notice ofAllowance issued in U.S. Appl. No. 11/054,515, dated Sep. 9, 2010.

Non-Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/605,202, dated Sep. 20, 2010.

Berenbaum, “Synergy, additivism and antagonism in immunosuppression,” Clin. Exp. Immunol., 28:1-18 (1977).

Dooley et al., “Mycophenolate mofetil therapy in lupus nephritis: clinical observations,” J Am. Soc. Nephrol, 10:833-839 (1999). Jonsson et al., “Mycophenolic acid inhibits inosine 5‘-monophosphate dehydrogenase and suppresses immunoglobulin and cytokine production ofB cells,”Int. Immunopharmacol., 3:31-37 (2003).

Koyama et al., “Raised serum APRIL levels in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus,”Ann. Rheum. Dis. 64:1065-1067 (2005). Ramanujam et al., “Mechanism of action of transmembrane activator and calcium modulator ligand interactor-Ig in murine systemic lupus erythematosus,” JImmunol. 173:3524-3534 (2004).

Stohl et al., “B lymphocyte stimulator protein-associated increase in circulating autoantibody levels may require CD4+T cells: lessons from HIV-infected patients,” Clin. Immunol. 104(2): 1 15 -122 (2002). Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/552,915, dated Sep. 22, 2010.

Notice ofAllowance issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/170,333, dated Oct. 8, 2010.

Extended European Search Report, European Application No. 10156941.6 dated Aug. 16,2010.

Non-Final Rejection issued in U. S. Appl. No. 12/701,301, dated Oct. 1 5, 2010.

Requirement for Restriction/Election issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/610,128, dated Nov. 29, 2010.

Requirement for Restriction/Election issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/275,804, dated Dec. 2, 2010.

Non-Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 11/054,539, dated Dec. 14, 2010.

Notice ofAllowance issued in U. S. Appl. No. 12/5 52,915, dated Dec. 2 1, 2010.

Requirement for Restriction/Election issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/870,394, dated Dec. 30, 2010.

Extended European Search Report, European Application No. 10185178.0 dated Dec. 21, 2010.

Extended European Search Report, European Application No. 10185182.2 dated Dec. 23, 2010.

Extended European Search Report, European Application No. 10185185.5 dated Dec. 23, 2010.

Edwards, J Mol. Biol., “The Remarkable Flexibility of the Human Antibody Repertoire; Isolation of Over One Thousand Different Antibodies to a Single Protein, BLyS,” 334(1): 103-118 (2003). Requirement for Restriction/Election issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/870,548, dated Feb. 3,2011.

Requirement for Restriction/Election issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/295,572, dated Feb. 18,2011.

Memorandum opinion and order issued Jun. 29, 2010 in Patent Interference No. 105,652.

Judgment on preliminary motions issued Jun. 29, 2010 in Patent Interference No. 105,652.

Examiner Interview Summary issued in U.S. Appl. No. 09/589,288, dated Feb. 22, 2011.

Non-Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 09/5 89,288, dated Mar. 2, 201 1 .

Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/701,301, dated Apr. 5, 201 1.

Notice ofAllowance issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/552,915, datedApr. 8, 201 1 .

Non-Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/ 275,804, dated Apr. 14, 201 1.

Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/135,025, dated Apr. 13, 201 1.

Non-Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/610,128, dated Apr. 14, 201 1.

Requirement for Restriction/Election issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/952,091, dated Apr. 28, 2011.

Non-Final Rejection issued in U. S. Appl. No. 12/870,394, dated May 4, 201 1 .

Final Rejection issued in U.S. Appl. No. 12/605,202, dated May 12, 201 1.

Notice of Appeal submitted by Human Genome Sciences on Mar. 8, 2010 in UK Supreme Court in support of EP Patent 0939804. Submission Pursuant to Rule 15 by Joseph Straus on Mar. 19, 2010 in UK Supreme Court case UKSC 2010/0047.

Skeleton Argument for Directions Hearing submitted by Human Genome Sciences on Sep. 30, 2010 in UK Supreme Court case UKSC 20 1 0/ 0047.

Skeleton Argument for Directions Hearing submitted by Eli Lilly on Sep. 30, 2010 in Uk Supreme Court case UKSC 2010/0047. Appellant’s case submitted by Human Genome Sciences on Jun. 13, 2011 in in UK Supreme Court case UKSC 2010/0047.

* cited by examiner