Appeal No. 1996-1813
Application No. 08/117,453
The use of two reference standards for calibration of the
spectrophotometer would meet the “calibrate over a range”
limitation of claim 1. As stated above, one of ordinary skill
in the art would have been motivated to add the automated
injection device to the spectrophotometric analysis system of
Maggard ‘785 in order to obtain a more efficient system.
Rejections over the Maggard WO‘762 reference
Claims 1-18 have been rejected as unpatentable under 35
U.S.C. § 103 over combination of Maggard WO‘762, Inman and
Dawes. Applicants argue that the examiner has not
established a prima facie case of obviousness. Applicants
position may be understood from the following excerpt from the
Brief and Reply Brief:
The final rejection does not cite any patent which
shows any automatic calibration of any instrument,
much less the inventors’ automatic calibration with
several fuels to cover a range of values for the
property, e.g. octane, being measured. Automatic
none of the cited references suggest the periodic
and automatic sampling from one or more hydrocarbon
blends of different known composition, and the
reporting of these calibration readings interspersed
among the actual measurements taken by the analysis.
(Brief page 18, lines 7-10).
(Brief, page 16, line 4-7).
When addressing the rejection of the claims 1-8 and 16-18
over the Maggard WO‘762 reference, applicants have not
15
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007