Appeal No. 2006-2569 Page 2
Application No. 09/485,245
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious over the combination
of Godiska1 and Shen.2 After careful review of the record and consideration of
the issues before us, we affirm the rejection of claims 7-14 as being obvious over
the combination of Godiska and Shen. Because we affirm that rejection, we
decline to reach the merits of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph.
DISCUSSION
Claims 7-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious
over the combination of Godiska and Shen. As appellant does not argue the
claims separately, they stand or fall together, and we focus our analysis on claim
7. See In re Dance, 160 F.3d 1339, 1340 n.2, 48 USPQ2d 1635, 1636 n.2 (Fed.
Cir. 1998) (noting that dependent claims not argued separately on the merits rise
or fall with the independent claim to which they relate).
Godiska is cited for teaching “a method comprising a random mixture of
oligonucleotides which are 6-mers, wherein the composition further contains at
least a supply of nucleotides for chain extension, a labeled nucleotide, and a
1 Godiska et al. (Godiska), U.S. Patent No. 5,759,804, issued June 2, 1998.
2 Shen et al. (Shen), EP 0 726 310 A1, published August 14, 1996.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007