Appeal No. 2006-1547 Page 24
Application No. 10/114,668
Neither Ulfendahl nor Yu describe arrays comprising a polymerase in a dry,
stable format. However, Morozov describes dry protein or DNA arrays, including the
use of trehalose to protect proteins against damage caused by drying. See e.g.,
Morozov, column 1, lines 19-25; column 16, line 30-column 17, line 11; column 27,
Example 4. (See Specification, ¶ 56, 92, where the presence of trehalose is described
in the specification as stabilizing the polymerase during the drying process). Since
Morozov discloses dry protein and DNA arrays, and methods of making them (e.g.,
column 27, Example 4), the person of ordinary skill in the art would have been
motivated with a reasonable expectation of success to have applied this technology to
produce kits comprising prefabricated dry DNA arrays as described in Yu (e.g., ¶ 76,
101). The application of Morozov’s technology for drying arrays of protein and DNA
would be well within the skill of the ordinary skilled worker.
Claims 21-23
Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 41.50, a new ground of rejection is made for claims 21-
23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Yu in view of Ulfendahl and Morozov
and Lin as applied to claims 8-11, 19, 20, and 24-28, and further in view of Shipwash.
Claims 21-23 are directed to delivering sample volumes (claim 21) by pulse-jet
fluid deposition (claim 22). As stated above, Shipwash describes pulse-jet technology
to deliver samples and reagents to microwells for nucleic acid reactions (claim 23).
Shipwash, ¶ 179. For the reasons which are already stated on page 17 above, we find
this to have been obvious application of a known technology.
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007