Appeal No. 1995-2839
Application 08/062,023
unsupported generalities. In re Freed, 425 F.2d 785, 787, 165 USPQ 570, 571 (CCPA
1970); In re Warner 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 178 (CCPA 1967), cert.
denied, 389 U.S. 1057 (1968). Accordingly, the rejection is reversed.
Rejections II and III
Turning to the remaining rejections in this case, we find that none of the applied
prior art teaches the simultaneous amplification of multiple target DNA sequences or the
T of the primers as required by the independent claim (claim 15); i.e., the claim on which
m
the claims encompassed by this rejection depend. Accordingly, the rejections are
summarily reversed.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
Mary F. Downey )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
William F. Smith ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
Joan Ellis )
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007