Appeal No. 2001-1650
Application No. 08/898,085
such that, when in operation, the gas-drawing means would draw gas across the
capture matrix, rather than through it. In our view, the references relied on do not
provide any motivation, teaching or suggestion for such a configuration. Rather,
Greenquist discloses, for example at column 6, lines 18-25, that the sample
should be drawn into the detection layer:
Where a first and second reagent layer are provided, the liquid test
medium is similarly permitted to diffuse and permeate into and
through the first reagent layer whereby the labeled reagent
incorporated therein is solubilized and the liquid test medium and
the labeled reagent further diffuse and permeate into and within the
second reagent layer and into and within the detection layer.
(Emphasis added.)
Thus, because Greenquist requires the sample to be drawn into the detection
layer, which corresponds to claim 19’s “capture matrix,” one of ordinary skill in
the art would not have been motivated to have modified Greenquist’s device with
a gas-drawing means which “does not draw said gas through said capture
matrix” as required in claim 19. That is, even if the prior art had provided
motivation for adding the vacuum pump of Ijsselmuiden or Clark to Greenquist’s
device, such combination would not have met the configuration of the device
required by claim 19.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007