Appeal No. 2001-0246
Application No. 08/921,103
and the junction solution flow on the other surface of the
junction which indicates a flowing junction solution (answer,
pages 7 and 8).
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d
1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993). A prima facie case of obviousness
is established by presenting evidence that the reference
teachings would appear to be sufficient for one of ordinary
skill in the relevant art having the references before him to
make the proposed combination or other modification. See In re
Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013, 1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA 1972).
After reviewing Europe, we agree with the Examiner that the
disclosed porous salt bridge has one surface exposed to the flow
of the sample fluid and the other surface exposed to the flow of
a reference fluid (col. 1, lines 49-53). As depicted in Figure
2, Europe discloses flow cell 10 in which the sample fluid
passes through flow path 13 on one side of porous bridge element
17 (col. 2, lines 45-48) and reference fluid passes through
tubes 15 and 16 into chamber 21 on the other side of the porous
bridge element (col. 3, lines 4-11). As also pointed out by
Appellants (brief, page 14), Europe further discloses that the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007