Appeal No. 2004-0615
Application No. 08/761,063
head 11 is an optical device (col. 8, lines 2-28). Cottingham’s
measuring device also is an optical device and is disclosed as
being suitable for use with the top film (col. 7, lines 7-45).
Hence, Cottingham would have indicated to one of ordinary skill
that Cottingham’s top film would not interfere with Takase’s
measuring head.
The appellants argue that “unlike the instantly-claimed
invention, the Takase platform uses an instruction set contained
in the CPU of the rotation device, and not on the platform
itself” (brief, page 15). Takase discloses an instruction set on
the platform itself (col. 12, lines 4-34).
The appellants argue that the appellants’ claims require
that the microchannels are enclosed within the first surface of
the platform, which means that the microchannels are surrounded
on all sides by the platform, whereas Takase’s flow paths having
Cottingham’s top film over them would be covered rather than
enclosed (reply brief, pages 2-3). The appellants do not point
out, and we do not find, support in the appellants’ original
disclosure for their claim interpretation. The only relevant
portion of the disclosure appears to be figure 17K which states
that “[o]nce the disk configuration has been burnt by a writable
CD player, the surface of the disk maybe [sic] sealed with a
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007