Appeal No. 97-3292
Application 08/522,827
We reverse the examiner’s rejection of appellants’ claims
under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning in support of this
conclusion appears below.
Figs. 7(a) through 7(f) of the present application
illustrate appellants’ procedure for examining subcutaneous
organ tissue, such as inside a breast, for cancer
(specification, page 11). As further disclosed
(specification, page 10), the
needle 35 of the probing end of assembly 31, Figs. 3, 5(a),
and 5(b), is provided with a curved or plane mirror 81 for
reflecting the light emitted from a quartz fiber bundle 33 at
a 90 degree angle and with a quartz window 83 through which
the 90 degree reflected light is transmitted to a tissue
sample. According to appellants, “[o]ne advantageous feature
associated with this construction is that an entire area can
be examined by rotating assembly 31 about its horizontal axis
like a periscope.”
Independent method claim 14 comprises, inter alia, the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007