Appeal No. 2005-0860
Application No. 09/363,728
THE REJECTIONS
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Bocker in view of Cheung.
Claims 2, 5 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Bocker in view of Cargin.
Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Davis ‘943 in view of Koenck and Davis ‘966.
Claim 4 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Brown in view of Cheung.
Attention is directed to the brief (filed June 30, 2003) and
answer (mailed November 4, 2003) for the respective positions of
the appellants and examiner regarding the merits of these
rejections.
DISCUSSION
I. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claim 1 as being
unpatentable over Bocker in view of Cheung
Bocker discloses “an analytical system for monitoring a
substance to be analyzed (analyte) which is present in the blood
of a patient” (column 1, lines 8 through 10). The system
includes a handheld central unit 3 comprising a keypad 20, a
display 21, a test duct 17 for receiving analyte test strips 13,
electronics 23 for measuring changes in the test strips
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007