Ex Parte BALABAN et al - Page 7



                       Appeal No. 2006-3105                                                                                                                        
                       Application No. 09/397,494                                                                                                                  

                       Layne teaches all of the limitations recited in independent claim 26 including the probe                                                    
                       array experiment.  The Summary of the Invention of Layne teaches that the process                                                           
                       controller translates user commands into test suite commands and for communicating                                                          
                       results to the user.  In column 8 of Layne, the discussion of Figure 4 teaches the use of a                                                 
                       remote automated testing and analysis capability and the use of the Internet.  The                                                          
                       communication to the remote lab includes instructions enabling program control tools to                                                     
                       define and perform automated tests.  Therefore, we find that Layne alone teaches and                                                        
                       fairly suggests the method of independent claim 26.    Furthermore, the Examiner has                                                        
                       combined the teachings of Dehlinger with respect to the use of a “probe array” which is                                                     
                       more akin to that which Appellants disclose in the specification.  We agree with the                                                        
                       Examiner that it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of the                                                       
                       invention to have implemented the methodology of Layne with various probes and their                                                        
                       corresponding experiments since this does not change the method, but only the range of                                                      
                       experiments that the method may be adapted to control.  Here, we find that the Examiner                                                     
                       has established a prima facie case of obviousness for the combined teachings of Layne                                                       
                       and Dehlinger.  Therefore, we look to Appellants’ briefs to identify an error in the                                                        
                       Examiner’s prima facie case.                                                                                                                
                                 Appellants argue that the                                                                                                         
                                 probe array experiments performed in accordance with the claimed embodiments                                                      
                                 utilize a radically different technology that differs in significant ways from the                                                
                                 robotic microtiter technology of Layne et al. '731.  One important difference                                                     
                                 between these technologies, is the vastly increased data volumes data expected to                                                 
                                 result from the probe array experiments conducted in accordance with the present                                                  
                                 invention.  For example, while Layne et al. '731 describe an experiment                                                           
                                 comprising at most ninety-six (96) wells at a time, Dehlinger '320 describes                                                      
                                 experiments in which data is simultaneously collected from large arrays                                                           
                                 comprising thousands of probes (Br. 6).                                                                                           

                                                                                7                                                                                  



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007