Appeal No. 2006-2198 Page 3
Application No. 10/074,499
22. The device of Claim 1 or 2 as a multiple array of devices grouped together
separately on the substrate so that multiple analytes can be detected
simultaneously from the same sample.
Claim 1 is directed to a device comprising two zones, each of which contains a
capture reagent (e.g., an antibody). The two capture reagents bind to the same analyte.
In the first zone, the capture reagent is immobilized between electrodes. In the second
zone, the capture reagent is bound to “an electrically conductive polymer in [the]
absence of electrically conductive metal particles.”
The specification defines “conductive polymer” to mean “any polymer which is
conductive and fluid mobile when bound to an analyte, particularly when bound with a
capture reagent. . . . The polyanilines are preferred.” Page 9, lines 12-28.
Claim 1 ends in a “wherein” clause that recites how the device functions: analyte
in a fluid sample is bound by the second capture reagent, then the analyte/capture
reagent complex is carried to the first zone by a transfer fluid, where the complex is
bound by the first capture reagent and the change in the conductivity or resistance
(caused by the electrically conductive polymer) is measured by the electrodes.
Claim 22 is directed to the same device “as a multiple array of devices grouped
together separately on the substrate.”
2. Obviousness based on Kim and Sigal
The examiner rejected claims 1, 2, 7-9, 14-16, 18, 19, and 21 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as obvious in view of Kim1 and Sigal.2 The examiner characterized Kim as
teaching all the limitations of instant claim 1, except for one: “Kim et al[.] fail to teach
1 Kim et al., “Conductimetric membrane strip immunosensor with polyaniline-bound gold colloids as signal
generator,” Biosensors & Bioelectronics, Vol. 14, pp. 907-915 (2000)
2 Sigal et al., U.S. Patent 6,319,670, issued Nov. 20, 2001
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007