Appeal 2007-1181
Application 10/513,879
Claims 8-12 and 16-17
Appellants assert that the claims stand or fall as a single group. (Br.
6). Therefore, we decide this ground of rejection based on claim 16. 37
C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2005).
The Examiner found that Guadagno discloses the invention as claimed
in claim 16 with the exception that the peroxygen reagent impregnated into
the absorbent sheet can be hydrogen peroxide. The Examiner relies on
Waldenburg for a teaching of a fecal occult blood testing device in which a
solution containing hydrogen peroxide and an alcohol reacts with guaiac
material to produce a blue color in the presence of occult blood in the feces.
The Examiner concluded that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of the invention to use hydrogen peroxide as the
peroxygen reagent impregnated into the absorbent sheet in the fecal occult
blood testing device taught by Guadagno since Waldenburg teaches that
hydrogen peroxide is a well known and commonly used peroxygen reagent
in combination with guaiac and an alcohol. (Answer 5).
Appellant does not contest the aforementioned findings. Rather
Appellant argues that neither reference discloses “air evacuation of the
sealed package holding premixed reagents on the absorbent material.”
(Reply Br. 7). We do not find these arguments persuasive for the reasons
noted above in connection with claims 14-15. Accordingly, the rejection of
claims 8-12 and 16-17 as unpatentable over Guadagno in view of
Waldenburg is affirmed.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013