Appeal No. 2006-1460
Application No. 10/033,315
bridging columns 14-15) and specifically detection based on light
absorbance (e.g., see the last paragraph in column 17 and the
paragraph bridging columns 18-19).
On the other hand, we share the appellants’ position that
the Wilding patent contains no express teaching of the ultrasonic
actuator or transducer feature recited in dependent claim 5.
Although Wilding teaches that the filling of a flow passage may
be assisted by vibration or other means (see lines 19-21 in
column 18), we do not find and the examiner does not identify any
explicit disclosure in this reference of an ultrasonic actuator
or transducer for performing a vibration or other function.
Finally, we perceive no persuasive merit in the appellants’
arguments concerning dependent claims 6 and 8-12. Wilding 1
unquestionably discloses the features of claims 6 and 8 (e.g.,
see lines 52-67 in column 16). Moreover, we agree with the
examiner’s contention (see the second paragraph on page 10 of the
answer), which the appellants have not disputed, that patentee’s
1The appellants’ arguments regarding claims 8, 11 and 12
inappropriately relate to features which are not recited in these
claims; see the last full paragraph on page 21 and the first full
paragraph on page 22 of the brief.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007