Appeal No. 2001-0250 Page 15
Application No. 08/283,074
address the examiner's rejection and the appellants' arguments
regarding the following claims:
• claims 1-4, 6, 7, 10-12, 17, 18, 21, 22, 81-83, and
89-91
• claims 15 and 16
• claims 23, 39, and 67.
A. Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 10-12, 17, 18, 21, 22, 81-83, and 89-91
The examiner alleges, "[a] confined volume geometry
characterizing apparatus/method of the type claimed is shown
in Fig.3 and described in the second column of page 1365 to
the first column of page 1366 of the Seybert et al
publication." (Examiner's Answer at 5.) He adds, "Schroeder
discloses the use of an acoustic impedance measuring
device/method for determining the geometry of a human airway
...." (Id. at 6-7.) The appellants argue, "all claims ...
include a processor means for, or the step of, producing an
output signal representative of the cross-sectional area of
said confined volume as a function of distance from said
opening in said confined volume and a processor or processing
step for producing such an output signal is not described in
the Seybert et al reference." (Appeal Br. at 13.)
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007