Appeal No. 1997-0881
Application No. 08/367,508
paper wherein the combination of both punchouts is the minimum surface area required for
testing.
Discussion
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103
Obviousness is a legal conclusion based on the underlying facts. Graham v. John
Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966); Continental Can Co. USA, Inc.
v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1270, 20 USPQ2d 1746, 1750 (Fed. Cir. 1991); Panduit
Corp. v. Dennison Mfg. Co., 810 F.2d 1561, 1566-68, 1 USPQ2d 1593, 1595-97 (Fed.
Cir. 1987). Here, the dispositive question is whether one of ordinary skill in this art at the
time of the invention would have found it obvious to make a first punchout in a dried blood
spot, which had previously been deposited on filter paper, and sequentially make at least a
second punchout in the same dried blood spot, wherein the boundaries of the second
punchout are entirely outside of the boundaries of the first punchout and the second
punchout has an inner portion removed therefrom which is the first punchout.
The examiner has cited Yee as disclosing a blood testing method which utilizes
filter paper which is first spotted with blood and allowed to dry. Samples are removed
from the filter paper using one or more punchouts in a predefined manner to obtain a
uniform volume of the blood sample. (Answer, page 4). The examiner acknowledges
that Yee (id.):
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007