Appeal No. 2000-0700
Application No. 08/453,320
of the volume of the medium at a locus of intersection interacts with each and with both
of the radiation pulses by process of two-photon interaction, while (ii) portions of the
volume of medium outside this locus are non-reactive with either radiation pulse; and
radiation-timing means for controlling the temporal phase of one of the two
directed radiation pulses relative to the other of the two directed radiation pulses in
order to select the volume portion of their intersection whereat occurs the two-photon
interaction.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Bron et al. (Bron) 3,466,616 Sept. 09, 1969
Fajans 3,715,734 Feb. 06, 1973
Adamson 3,609,706 Sep. 28, 1971
Swainson et al. (Swainson) 4,466,080 Aug. 14, 1984
Savit et al. (Savit) 4,707,787 Nov. 17, 1987
Claims 1-5 and 7-11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first and second
paragraphs as being indefinite and insufficiently disclosed. Claims 1-5 and 7-30 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Bron, Fajans, Adamson,
Swainson or Savit.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the
examiner's answer (Paper No. 19, mailed Aug. 9, 1999) for the examiner's reasoning in
support of the rejections, and to the appellant's brief (Paper No. 17, filed Oct. 6, 1997)
for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007