Appeal No. 2003-0533
Application No. 09/511,183
chamber for collection therein, the validation chamber being
smaller than the sample chamber, removing the validation chamber
from the apparatus without disturbing the sample chamber, and
evaluating the representative sample whereby the viability of the
sample in the sample chamber is determined.
In rejecting each of these independent claims, the examiner
has relied upon at least the basic combination of the Michaels
and White patents.
A review of the Michaels reference reveals to us the
knowledge in the subsurface formation testing art of an apparatus
including removably assembled sample vessels that can be
transported separately to a suitable site for laboratory analysis
or analyzed on site (column 1, lines 14 through 26 and column 5,
line 59 to column 6, line 5). Sample container receptacles or
tanks 26, 28 (Fig. 2) are perceived as being of the same size.
The patent to White addresses (column 5, lines 57 through
68) a sample apparatus for use in a well that includes four
removable sample chambers 104, 106, 108, and 110 (Figs. 2C-2E and
Fig. 3). As indicated by the patentee, (column 10, lines 46
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007