Ex Parte Cohen et al - Page 2

                Appeal 2006-2801                                                                              
                Application 09/989,684                                                                        
                      Appellants' invention is directed to an optical disc for separating                     
                disperse particles from particle agglutinants.  Representative claim 77, as                   
                presented in the Brief, is reproduced below:                                                  
                      77. An optical disc for separating disperse particles from particle                     
                agglutinants, comprising:                                                                     
                      a plurality of tracks disposed on an outer periphery of the optical disc;               
                      a main chamber disposed between at least a portion of the plurality of                  
                tracks and a light detector, the main chamber comprising:                                     
                      an entry chamber configured to accept a sample; and                                     
                      a separation structure comprising solid components spaced apart to                      
                form gaps, the gaps being large enough to allow disperse particles to change                  
                position relative to the center of the disc by passing through the separation                 
                structure, the gaps being too small to allow particle agglutinants to pass                    
                through the separation structure;                                                             
                      wherein a quantity of disperse particles may be determined by using                     
                the light detector to count a number of the plurality of tracks that are covered              
                by the disperse particles.                                                                    
                      The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on                    
                appeal is:                                                                                    
                Virtanen   US 6,030,581   Feb. 29, 2000                                                       
                                                                                                             
                      The Examiner has entered the following grounds of rejection:                            
                      I. Claims 9, 12, 25-31, 77, and 78 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.                         
                § 102(b) as being anticipated by Virtanen.                                                    





                                                      2                                                       

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013