Appeal No. 1997-4259
Application No. 08/259,474
112, first paragraph. Accordingly, we will not sustain the
examiner's rejection of claims 9 and 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
first paragraph.
Turning next to the examiner's rejection of claims 9 and
30 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, it follows from
our determination above that we do not share the examiner’s
view that there is no basis for "standard mammographic
procedures, intensities and exposure times." Given that
standard mammographic procedures, intensities and exposure
times were known to those skilled in the art at the time of
appellants’ invention, we are of the view that appellants do
particularly point out and distinctly claim that which they
regard as their invention in claims 9 and 30 on appeal and it
is our opinion that the scope and content of the subject
matter embraced by appellants' claims 9 and 30 on appeal (as
it regards standard mammographic procedures, intensities and
exposure times) is reasonably clear and definite. For that
reason, we will not sustain the examiner's rejection of
appellants' claims 9 and 30 on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007