Appeal No. 1996-1813
Application No. 08/117,453
Spectrophotometric analysis of large number of samples is
performed more efficiently by the use of the automated fluid
injection device. (Column 1, lines 57-63). It would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art who performs
spectrophotometric analysis on a large number of samples to
incorporate an automatic injection device in the process of
Maggard ‘785 in order to obtain an efficient operation. The
measurement for aromatic content performed in Maggard ‘785 on
the two reference samples would provide calibration of the
spectrophotometer “over a range” as required by claim 1.
Applicants argue that the vibrating element of Dawes,
used to degas a stationary liquid which is open to the
atmosphere, would be useless to replace the debubbler recited
in claim 8. (Brief, paragraph bridging pages 18-19). First,
we note claim 8 does not recite a “debubbler”. To the extent
that applicants assert that Dawes does not suggest the
desirability of degassing a liquid prior to spectrophotometric
analysis, we do not agree. Dawes discloses that the degassing
of liquids is desirable prior to chemical analysis. (Column
2, lines 33-40). The appearance of bubbles in samples
subjected to spectrophotometric analysis could effect the IR
reading produced. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007