Ex Parte CHAN et al - Page 4




          Appeal No.  2001-0246                                                       
          Application No.  08/921,103                                                 

               The references relied on by the Examiner in rejecting the              
          claims are:                                                                 
          Hofmeier et al. (Hofmeier)    4,714,527      Dec. 22, 1987                  
          McNeal et al. (Europe)        0 338 017 A2   Sep. 19, 1990                  
               (European Patent Application)                                          
               A. K. Covington et al. (Covington), “Improvements in the               
          Precision Of PH Measurements - A Laboratory Reference Electrode             
          With Renewable Free-diffusion Liquid Junction,” Analytica                   
          Chimica Acta, 169 (1985), pp. 221-229.                                      
                                                                                     
               Claim 47 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being             
          unpatentable over Europe and Hofmeier.                                      
               Claim 49 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being             
          unpatentable over Europe and Hofmeier in view of Covington.                 
               We make reference to the answer (Paper No. 40, mailed                  
          February 28, 2000) for the Examiner’s reasoning and to the brief            
          (Paper No. 38, filed October 7, 1999) and the reply brief (Paper            
          No. 41, filed April 24, 2000) for Appellants’ arguments                     
          thereagainst.                                                               
                                       OPINION                                        
               At the outset, we note that Appellants indicate their                  
          intention that claims 47 and 49 stand or fall together (brief,              
          page 5).  Thus, we will consider the claims separately only to              
          the extent they correspond to each ground of rejection and will             
          limit our consideration to independent claim 47.                            

                                          4                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007