Claim 1 neither defines functional

Claim 1 neither defines functional nor constructional relationships between theclaimed modules and it is therefore not clear how the modules are forming adevice (see also above).In view of the fact that claim 1 only defines a collectionof non-related modules,any prior art document disclosing the generally knownmethod wherein a biological sample is lysed,nucleic acid is extracted andamplified,and the result is detected,can be considered as at least implicitlynovelty destroying for claim 1,because for performing such method the claimedmodules are necessary.Because there appears to be an extremely largenumber of such documents,only some examples out of many have been citedin the supplementary European search report.The applicant is informed thatmore documents can be cited in a later stage of the procedure,depending onthe direction the applicant chooses for amending claim 1.