Appeal No. 2002-1359
Application No. 09/323,990
the mixer and the flow rates being such that the residence time of the cell suspension in
the mixer is less than the time for lysis to be completed.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:
Wan et al. (Wan) 5,837,529 Nov. 17, 1998
Bowe et al. (Bowe) 2,241,796A Sept. 11, 1991
European Patent
Grounds of Rejection
Claims 1, 4-7 and 11-13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for as obvious
over Wan in view of Bowe.
We reverse this rejection.
DISCUSSION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given consideration to the
appellant's specification and claims, to the applied references, and to the respective
positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner’s
Answer for the examiner’s reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the appellant's
Brief for the appellant's arguments thereagainst. As a consequence of our review, we
make the determinations which follow.
35 U.S.C. § 103
Claims 1, 4-7 and 11-13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for as obvious
over Wan in view of Bowe.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007