Appeal No. 1999-0554
Application No. 08/657,903
directed to detecting the chlorine content of an aqueous
liquid by detecting the sum of hypochlorous and chloramine
chlorine, whereas Sands involves a system for maintaining a
constant potential between a plating solution and a plating
electrode. Neither Sands nor Marks teaches, nor has the
examiner established, that, as a general proposition, one of
ordinary skill in the art would have understood that, as a
viable option, the reference electrode of a salt bridge system
can be situated in either the process solution or a separate,
insulated bath. In our view, it is incumbent upon the
examiner to demonstrate that such a general principle was
known in the art in order to reasonably conclude that the
proposed modification of Oliver would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art.
The additional references applied by the examiner do not
remedy the deficiency of the collective teachings of Oliver,
Sands and Marks discussed above. However, we note that while
appellants separately argue claim 7, which recites a
microporous ceramic used in a portion of the salt bridge which
makes contact with the gelatin aqueous solution, Marks
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007