Appeal No. 2001-0628
Application No. 09/118,665
specification refers to “positioning fixtures” which
are mounted to the support member but fails to disclose
what those fixtures would be [answer, page 3].
In a similar vein, the examiner considers the appellants’
specification as failing to comply with the enablement
requirement with respect to the claimed subject matter at issue
because
[g]iven the structure shown in figure 43 and
appellant’s [sic] comments regarding the lack of
operability of the prior art devices in the disclosed
vertical chamber, it is unclear as to which positioning
fixtures would be used and mounted to enable them to
operate in a vertical chamber. If appellant’s [sic]
previously disclosed positioning devices are used,
appellant [sic] fails to show how the structure of such
would be modified so as to enable its use in a vertical
chamber [answer, page 4].
The appellants note that “[p]ages 8 through 36 of the
specification, taken in conjunction with Figs. 1 through 42 of
the application drawings, disclose various positioning fixtures
which grip a portion of a patient’s body adjacent to a joint with
a cuff” (brief, page 11). According to the appellants, “any one
of the positioning fixtures could be utilized with the upright
imaging unit illustrated in Fig. 43” (brief, page 12). The
appellants go on to explain that
[t]he positioning fixtures of Figs. 1 through 42
of the application have been described, prior to page
37 of the application, in conjunction with a horizontal
imaging unit 12 (Fig. 1A). At page 47 [sic, page 37],
lines 21 through 25 of the specification, it is
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007