Appeal No. 2004-0615
Application No. 08/761,063
clear, partially porous membrane to allow for the controlled
movement of fluids on the disk without the need for specific
vents.” This disclosure indicates that the appellants’ term
“enclosed within” includes covering by a film.
The appellants argue that in their specification and claims
they consistently have described the microchannels as being
enclosed within the platform surface (reply brief, pages 3-4).
The appellants do not point out, and we do not find, the term
“enclosed within” in the appellants’ original specification
including the claims. The appellants originally disclosed that
the microchannels, as well as the reaction chamber and reagent
reservoir, are embedded in the first surface of the platform
(specification, page 12, lines 8-9 and 11-13; claim 3).
For the above reasons we conclude that the appellants’
claimed apparatus would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art over the applied references.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1-56, 64-70, 78-81 and 84 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over Takase in view of Cottingham and Zaffaroni
is affirmed.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007