Appeal No. 1997-3434
Application No. 08/307,075
In view of appellants’ admission in the specification
that the calculating/measuring of depth of interaction (DOI)
can be accomplished with conventional circuitry as disclosed
by Gagnon, we agree with appellants that “corresponding
structure, material or acts” are not needed in the disclosure
for such conventional circuitry. The lack of enablement
rejection is, therefore, reversed because “[t]he Answer
presents no evidence that those skilled in the art would not
be able to make and use the invention from the disclosure”
(Reply Brief, page 2).
In response to the indefiniteness rejection, appellants
argue (Brief, pages 8 and 9) that:
[C]laim 2 reasonably apprises those skilled
in the art that its scope is limited to
computing circuitry which receives electrical
output signals from first and second arrays
of photodiodes and measures depth of interaction
of a scintillation event within a crystal in
response to those signals. One skilled in the
art would have no difficulty in determining whether
a gamma ray imaging detector having computing
circuitry is or is not within the scope of claim 2.
Claim 2 is not limited to a particular computing
circuit simply because such particulars are
irrelevant to the invention.
With respect to claim 8, this claim . . . sets
forth the specific parameters which are used
to perform the claimed step and as such fully
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007