Appeal No. 2003-0303
Application 09/096,521
both MRI and an optical imaging device, as set forth in the
claims before us on appeal. In that regard, we share
appellants’ views as expressed on pages 5 through 11 of the
brief, which positions we adopt as our own.
Simply stated, we view the examiner's position
regarding the proposed combination of Nelson, Chance and the
APA as being based on hindsight and an improper "obvious to
try" rationale relying on the general concept of a phantom
for X-ray imaging as in Nelson and the known techniques of
imaging tissue using MRI and optical examination in Chance,
but without any guidance or suggestion in the applied
references or the APA as to how to achieve a breast-shaped
phantom formed specifically for imaging by both a standard
magnetic resonance imaging device and an optical imaging
device, or any reasonable indication that it would have been
desirable or feasible to do so.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007