Appeal No. 1999-0028
Application No. 08/513,610
are claims 12 and 16 through 19, and the examiner should take
appropriate action relative to the unappealed claims.
Appellant’s invention pertains to a method for diagnosing
a patient. A basic understanding of the invention can be
derived from a reading of exemplary claim 12, a copy of which
appears in the APPENDIX to the brief (Paper No. 12).
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner has applied the
documents listed below:
McMahon et al 4,394,074 Jul. 19,
1983
(McMahon)
Sklar et al 5,098,426 Mar. 24,
1992
(Sklar)
The following rejections are before us for review.
Claims 12 and 16 through 19 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as being based upon a
disclosure which lacks enablement for treatment steps.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007