Appeal No. 2001-0103
Application 08/763,465
The Rejection of Claims 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 11, 17, 22, 30, and 33-37 under 35 U.S.C.
§102(b) as being anticipated by Pace is reversed.
The Rejection of Claims 1-14, 17-18, 22-23, and 25-38 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a)
as being unpatentable over Heller is reversed.
The rejection of Claims 15-16 and 19-20 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being
unpatentable over Heller in view of Northrup I is reversed.
The rejection of Claims 1-38 under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-
type double patenting over claims 1-22 of Northrup II is affirmed.
OTHER ISSUES
We note that Pace, column 8, line 65 to column 9, line 19 describes a method of
using the analytical device. One step includes filling reservoirs and samples through an
access hole (not shown) in glass plate 38. Neither the Appellant nor the Examiner have
considered this disclosure of an opening enabling insertion of a fluid on this record and
we commend it to their attention for appropriate consideration if further prosecution on
the merits is undertaken. It may be that such an access hole corresponds to the slot
required by claim 1 on appeal.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007