Appeal No. 2005-0663
Application No. 09/682,142
back into the groundwater" (page 1 of principal brief, last
paragraph). The claimed method on appeal performs in-well
monitoring by sensing the effectiveness of the PRB treatment and
generating a signal that is in-well transmitted by wireless
communication to a remote monitor.
Appealed claims 1-35 and 44-66 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the PRB papers or
The Corps of Engineers Papers in view of Misquitta.
In accordance with the grouping of claims set forth at pages
12 and 13 of appellants' principal brief, the following groups of
claims stand or fall together:
(I) claims 1, 5, 15, 17-22, 44-46, 50, 51, 55-61 and
63-65;
(II) claims 2 and 47;
(III) claims 3 and 48;
(IV) claims 4 and 49;
(V) claims 6, 26 and 52;
(VI) claims 7, 27 and 53;
(VII) claims 8, 28 and 54;
(VIII) claim 9
(IX) claims 10-14
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007