Appeal No. 2005-0855 3
Application No. 10/269,807
when the half-life of the selected positron emitter is
greater than or equal to the selected half-life, then performing
a normal activation/analysis process, said normal
activation/analysis process comprising:
activating the selected positron emitter by bombarding the
specimen with photons having energies at least as great as the
threshold photon energy; and
detecting gamma rays produced by annihilation of positrons
with electrons in the specimen.
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1 and 8 through 39 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, as being based on a specification which
fails to comply with the enablement requirement.
Claims 1 and 8 through 39 also stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as failing to particularly point
out and distinctly claim the subject matter the appellant regards
as the invention.
Attention is directed to the main, reply and supplemental
briefs and the second answer for the respective positions of the
appellant and the examiner regarding the merits of these
rejections.1
1
1 In the Office action which reopened prosecution, claims 1
and 8 through 10 additionally stood rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, as being based on a specification which
fails to comply with the written description requirement. Upon
reconsideration, the examiner has withdrawn this rejection (see
page 2 in the second answer). Presumably, the examiner also has
withdrawn any reasoning relating to the two remaining rejections
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007