Appeal No. 2005-1234 Page 8
Application No. 09/749,752
positions of the probes to which the target substance has bound and
simultaneously detecting the management information attached to the test
piece,” which requires the structure to perform the two functions of obtaining
information concerning the positions of the probes to which the target substance
has bound, and simultaneously detecting the management information attached
to the test piece.
With respect to independent claims 20 and 21, those claims require
“means for obtaining information concerning the positions of the probes to which
the target substance has bound,” “wherein obtaining the information concerning
the positions of the probes to which the target substance has bound occurs
simultaneously with detecting the management information attached to the test
piece.” We read those two limitations together to again require that the structure
perform two functions, that is obtaining information concerning the positions of
the probes to which the target substance has bound and simultaneously
detecting the management information attached to the test piece. Thus, using
the analysis set forth above, we construe the structure for the recited means as
being a stimulable phosphor sheet.
Turning to the anticipation rejections of record, the examiner has rejected
all of the claims on appeal as being anticipated by either Zeleny, Noblett or
Perttunen. Under 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph, the claim is “construed to
cover corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and
equivalents thereof.” Thus, a reference may still be anticipatory even if the
structure disclosed by that reference is not identical to that claimed, if the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007