Appeal No. 97-3136 Page 9
Application No. 08/312,780
The appellants argue (brief, pp. 17-23) that the claimed
pumping system including the presetting means is not disclosed
or suggested by the applied prior art. We agree.
Specifically, the examiner relied upon the teachings of Buys
(at columns 17 and 18) as suggesting the claimed pumping
system. We do not agree. The automatic control unit
disclosed by Buys is for measuring the power of the laser
radiation emitted in order to control the shutter means 38 and
the scanning means. Buys does not even disclose a pumping
system for illuminating a laser crystal with pumping light.
Thus, Buys automatic control unit does not include and would
not have suggested (1) a pumping light source for irradiating
the pumping light on the laser crystal, (2) a presetting means
for setting in advance a value of output power of laser light
adaptable to different medical treatment requirements, and (3)
a power supply for providing the pumping light source with a
suitable input power based on the output power value set by
the presetting means.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007