Appeal No. 1997-2388
Application No. 08/326,304
housing containing an absorbent material positioned adjacent to the membrane as is
known in the art" (answer, page 6). Additionally, as to kit claims 21, 23, and 25, the
examiner maintains "recitation of 'comprising a membrane precoated with albumin or
casein but not with a specific capture antibody' does not exclude or preclude addition of a
capture antibody at some time after the membrane pretreatment" (answer, paragraph
bridging pages 5-6). However, as discussed above, the examiner has not established a
reasonable expectation of success in later attachment of antibody to an albumin blocked
support. Again, we find nothing in Bagshawe which makes up for the deficiencies in
Ebersole. Therefore, based on this record, the rejection of claims 21, 23, and 25 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 over Ebersole in view of Bagshawe is reversed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decisions of the examiner to (1) reject claims 1, 4, and 8 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ebersole, (2) to reject claim 9 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ebersole as applied to claim 1 in view of
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007