Appeal No. 2007-1027 Page 2
Application No. 10/134,575
GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claims 5, 6, and 8-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by New.
Claims 5-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over the combination of New and Leung.
We affirm the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). We reverse the
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
DISCUSSION
Anticipation:
Claims 5, 6, and 8-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by New. According to appellants the claims stand or fall together.
Deleted: with
Brief, page 3. Since the claims stand or fall together, we limit our discussion to
representative claim 5. Claims 6 and 8-10 will stand or fall together with claim 5.
37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (July 2006).
Claim 5 is drawn to a composition that comprises (1) a bile salt and (2) a
special stain.1 According to appellants’ specification (page 1, lines 14-16),
“[s]pecial stains is a term given to a collection of chemically-based stains that
have been developed in response to difficult to stain tissue types, unusual
diseases, infections diseases or other non-typical situations affecting the tissue.”
Nevertheless, for the purposes of their disclosure appellants define a “special
1 We recognize appellants’ assertion that an amendment was filed together with the Reply Brief.
We note, however, that this amendment was not entered into the record. See Action, mailed
June 14, 2005. Accordingly, we have not considered appellants’ arguments related to the
amendment filed with the Reply Brief.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013