Appeal No. 2002-0230
Application No. 09/136,070
BRADLEY R. GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge, dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision to reverse the prior art
rejections advanced by the examiner on this appeal.
I share the examiner’s conclusion that it would have been obvious for one with
ordinary skill in this art to reposition the connection hole of Rokugawa’s reagent
container from its existing location at a sidewall surface to a new location at the
bottom surface of the container as required by appealed independent claim 1.
According to the majority, “[t]he Examiner has not adequately explained why there is
motivation to move the connection from the side of the reagent container of
Rokugawa.” Slip Op., page 5. This is incorrect.
The examiner has advanced two separate rationales in support of her
determination that an artisan with ordinary skill would have been motivated to
reposition Rokugawa’s connection hole in the manner discussed above. In her first
rationale, the examiner urges that an artisan would have been motivated to reposition
patentee’s connection hole in order “to allow the reagent to be dispensed under the
force of gravity [i.e., the additional gravity force at a bottom versus sidewall location
due to the greater mass of reagent thereabove].” Answer, page 6. As her second
rationale in support of motivation, the examiner states that, “[a]dditionally, the
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007