Appeal No. 94-4081
Application 07/750,031
known and has two dimensions. Appellants’ contention that laser
scanning can be applied to small structures has not been rebutted
by the examiner (main brief, page 18). Therefore claim 46
reasonably apprises one of ordinary skill in the art of its
scope.
The examiner has not shown or adequately explained why two
dimensional scanning “has meaning only in a medium such as a TLC
plate” (main answer, paragraph bridging pages 4-5). Accordingly,
the rejection of claim 46 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, is reversed.
B. The Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103
The rejection of claims 42-45 under § 103 as unpatentable
over Ma is affirmed for substantially the reasons set forth by
the examiner in the main answer, pages 5-8. We add the following
comments for emphasis.
Appellants argue that Ma deals with indirect fluorometric
detection but with respect to thin-layer chromatography that does
not utilize differential electrical interaction between charged
components of the mixture being separated and an electric
potential (main brief, page 7, emphasis added). Appellants
similarly argue that “the nature of separation in the present
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007