Ex Parte BROOKS - Page 1




                         The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written           
                                for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.                    

                                                                             Paper No. 16                     
                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                              
                                                _________                                                     

                            BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                
                                         AND INTERFERENCES                                                    
                                                __________                                                    
                                     Ex parte ROBERT CECIL BROOKS                                             
                                                 __________                                                   
                                            Appeal No. 2002-1359                                              
                                         Application No. 09/323,990                                           
                                                __________                                                    
                                                 ON BRIEF                                                     
                                                __________                                                    
            Before MILLS, GRIMES, and GREEN  Administrative Patent Judges.                                    
            MILLS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                               

                                           DECISION ON APPEAL                                                 
                   This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. §134 from the examiner's final                
            rejection of claims 1, 4-7 and 11-131, which are the claims on appeal in this application.        
                   Claim 1 is illustrative of the claims on appeal and reads as follows:                      
                   1.  A method for processing cells wherein an aqueous suspension of cells is                
            intimately mixed with a lysis reagent by passage through a mixer, the mixer being a               
            fluidic vortex mixer comprising a substantially cylindrical chamber with an axial outlet at       
            the centre of an end wall of the chamber, and with at least two inlets at or near the             
            periphery of the chamber, at least one inlet being substantially tangential so as to cause        
            spiralling flow in the chamber, the chamber containing no baffles, and the dimensions of          

                   1  The examiner has withdrawn a rejection of claims 2-3 and 8-10 in view of Wan            
            and Bowe.  These claims remain objected to, however, as dependent upon a rejected                 
            base claim.                                                                                       





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007