Ex Parte Majewski et al - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2003-1278                                                                  Page 2                
              Application No. 09/577,701                                                                                  


                                                    BACKGROUND                                                            
                     The appellants' invention relates to apparatus for optically coupling pixilated                      
              scintillation arrays with position sensitive photomultipliers (specification, p. 1).  A copy of             
              the claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellants' brief.                              


                     The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                      
              appealed claims are:                                                                                        
              Hilton et al. (Hilton)                     3,225,193                    Dec. 21, 1965                       
              Spelha et al. (Spelha)                     3,723,735                    Mar. 27, 1973                       
              Muehllehner                                3,937,964                    Feb. 10, 1976                       
              Persyk                                     5,059,798                    Oct. 22, 1991                       
              Yamakawa et al. (Yamakawa)                 5,442,181                    Aug. 15, 1995                       


                     Claims 1, 4 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                         
              over Muehllehner in view of Hilton.                                                                         


                     Claims 2 and 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over                       
              Muehllehner in view of Hilton and Spelha.                                                                   


                     Claims 3 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over                       
              Muehllehner in view of Hilton and Persyk.                                                                   









Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007