Appeal No. 2006-0103 Page 2
Application No. 10/172,892
to be expensive, precious, or limited to very small quantities. Therefore, current methods
seek to reduce the amount of sample required by reducing the amount of sample solution
needed to contact the array.” Page 1, line 30 to page 2, line 2.
One such technique is “to place a gasket between the array surface and a mating
opposite surface and clamp with an external force. The distance between the two
surfaces is typically between 0.5mm and 1.0 mm. . . . The problem with these types of
chambers is the large volume of liquid sample required to fill the volume between the two
surfaces while covering the array area.” Page 2, lines 24-34.
The specification discloses “a method of performing a hybridization assay using an
assay chamber that includes a form-in-place gasket.” Page 5, lines 22-23. “A form-in-
place gasket . . . refers to a gasket which is formed on a gasket surface in a process that
involves depositing a gasket material onto the gasket surface.” Page 8, lines 1-3. “Gasket
material references a fluid material having properties that render the fluid material suitable
for formation of a gasket.” Page 8, lines 9-10. “Suitable gasket materials include, e.g.
silicone sealants, urethanes, and polysulfides. Still other suitable gasket materials are,
e.g. latex, and acrylic sealants.” Page 16, lines 15-16. “After the gasket material is
deposited in the predetermined configuration at the desired site, the gasket material is
allowed to cure to form the form-in-place gasket.” Page 17, lines 25-27.
Discussion
1. Claim construction
Claims 1-17 are pending. Appellants have argued claims 1, 10, and 17
separately. See Appeal Brief, pages 5-50. We will therefore consider claims 1, 10, and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007