The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 21
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte PETER WILDING, and LARRY J. KRICKA
__________
Appeal No. 2003-1103
Application No. 09/212,029
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before SCHEINER, MILLS, and GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judges.
GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the examiner’s
final rejection of claims 12-15, 23, 39, 40, and 44-47.1 Claim 44 is representative
and reads as follows:
44. A device for amplifying a preselected polynucleotide in a sample by
conducting a polynucleotide polymerization reaction, the device comprising:
a solid substrate microfabricated to define:
a sample inlet port; and
a mesoscale flow system comprising:
1 Claims 24 and 41 are also pending. The examiner has indicated that these claims would be
allowable if rewritten to eliminate their dependence on rejected claims. See Paper No. 11, mailed
Sept. 26, 2000, page 5.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007