Appeal No. 2002-1856
Application No. 09/255,699
refill calibration in addition to bubble detection (see Ciardella
at column 7, lines 27 through 60; and column 9, lines 33 through
43), with Sander’s spectrometer video camera 44. The only
suggestion for selectively combining these disparate teachings in
the manner proposed by the examiner stems from hindsight
knowledge impermissibly derived from the appellants’ disclosure.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of claim 10 as being unpatentable over
Ciardella in view of Houser, or the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
rejection of claims 1, 18 and 19 as being unpatentable over
Ciardella in view of Houser and Sander.
As Robertson’s disclosure of a pharmaceutical inhaler does
not overcome the deficiencies of Ciardella and Houser relative to
parent claim 10, we also shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of dependent claim 12 as being unpatentable
over Ciardella in view of Houser and Robertson.2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007