Appeal No. 2001-0692 Page 6
Application No. 09/163,572
Fig. 2 multiwell plate grids with a single clone common to both plates.”
Examiner’s Answer, page 4. See also page 8: “It is the examiner’s position that
Evans teaches the presently claimed method of testing a plurality of compounds
for activity. In the wells of Evans, a plurality of compounds is added and their
activity is determined, all simultaneously. Note that the reaction of a probe being
positive or negative is an activity determination.”
“It is well settled that a claim is anticipated if each and every limitation is
found either expressly or inherently in a single prior art reference.” Celeritas
Techs. Ltd. v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., 150 F.3d 1354, 1361, 47 USPQ2d 1516, 1522
(Fed. Cir. 1998). “[T]he description of a single embodiment of broadly described
subject matter constitutes a description of the invention for anticipation
purposes.” In re Lukach, 442 F.2d 967, 970, 169 USPQ 795, 797 (CCPA 1971).
We agree with the examiner that Evans anticipates instant claim 1. Claim
1 is directed to a screening method in which a plurality of test compounds are
placed into at least two arrays, each of which has a plurality of test zones;
multiple compounds are placed into each test zone, and at least one identical
compound is placed into each of the two arrays. After the test compounds are
placed into the arrays, the claimed method entails determining the location of
each compound in the test zones of each array, determining the response activity
of the compounds to the testing screen, and ascertaining which compounds had
a positive response to the testing screen.
In the method disclosed by Evans, different DNA molecules (cosmids) are
“organized as an ordered matrix.” Abstract; see also Figure 2. All of the cosmids
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007