Appeal No. 1998-2213
Application 08/655,863
THE REJECTIONS
The claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as follows:
claims 6-9, 12 and 14-17 over Sugaya in view of Kurimura, and
claim 11 over Sugaya in view of Kurimura and Scholten.
OPINION
We affirm the aforementioned rejections.
The appellants state that each of claims 6-8, 12 and 16
stands or falls separately and that claims 14 and 15 stand or
fall together, as do claims 9 and 17 (brief, page 3). Hence, we
address claims 6-8, 12 and 16, one claim from each of the two
groups, i.e., claims 9 and 14, and separately-rejected claim 11.
See In re Ochiai, 71 F.3d 1565, 1566 n.2, 37 USPQ2d 1127, 1129
n.2 (Fed. Cir. 1995); 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(1997).
Claim 6
The appellants do not challenge the examiner’s finding
(answer, page 4) that Sugaya discloses a biochemical analysis
apparatus having each of the elements recited in claim 6 except
for the pressure monitoring means. Moreover, the appellants
acknowledge that such an apparatus was known to those of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of the appellants’ invention
(specification, page 4, lines 10-24).
-3-3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007