Appeal No. 2006-0703 Page 5
Application No. 09/268,437
reacted with their substrates, i.e., glucose and cholesterol, respectively, see
column 50, Table II. Thus, the use of the glucose/cholesterol sensor by the
addition of a test sample containing substrate, i.e., glucose and cholesterol, is
inherently taught by the reference, and thus Cozzette is deemed to anticipate the
invention of claim 11.
Claims 1-5 and 122 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
anticipated by Henkens.
Henkens is relied upon for teaching a simultaneous electrochemical assay
device, wherein “[t]he device comprises a plurality of working electrodes and one
or more reference or counter electrodes.” Examiner’s Answer, page 4.
Henkens, according to the examiner, teaches that the device “may optionally
include a common (one) reference or counter electrode, or more reference or
counter electrodes.” Id. The reference is also relied upon for teaching “that
whether in an array of working electrodes or a single working electrode, the
electrochemical assay device may optionally include a common (one) reference
or counter electrode, or more reference or counter electrodes.” Id. Henkens is
also relied upon for teaching that the plurality of working electrodes quantitatively
measure enzymatic reaction product, and as the device does not contain a
means to mix the sample in the cell, the examiner contends that Henkens
anticipates the claimed invention. See id. at 4-5.
2 Claim 11 also stands rejected, but because we affirmed the rejection of that claim as being
anticipated by Cozzette, we decline to reach the merits as to the rejection of that claim as to
Henkens.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007