Appeal No. 1999-0445
Application No. 08/351,583
The examiner urges that the appellant's specification fails to provide an enabling
disclosure of a tonometer comprising a processing means for "determining an amended time
based on the time detected by the time detection means when the result of the pressure
comparison indicates that the pressure change is different than the standard pressure
characteristic" as recited in claim 1. As explained in the appellant's specification, from page
11, line 24, to page 12, line 13, the microcomputer circuit 6, which corresponds to the recited
processing means, behaves as follows:
a) If the rate of change X(t) is equal to 1 (i.e., no difference between the
pressure change and the standard pressure characteristic), the actual curve is
used to determine intraocular pressure (IOP). In this case, time is not amended.
b) If the rate of change is not equal to 1 (i.e., a difference is detected
between the pressure change and standard pressure characteristic), then time t is
) )
amended to t wherein t = t@X(tx) and the IOP is calculated using the amended
time.
c) If the rate of change is greater than 1.3, a stop signal is input to the
solenoid driving circuit 9 to prevent the applied air pressure from rising
abnormally. In this instance, an amended time may not be determined.
The examiner does not contend that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been able to
make and use a microprocessor which operates as set forth in situations a) through c) above
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007