Appeal No. 2005-1147 2
Application No. 09/834,440
(a) measuring at least one optical property at a first area
on a body part of said human subject to obtain a first set of
data, said first area being subjected to a first temperature
program;
(b) measuring at least one optical property at a second area
on said body part to obtain a second set of data, said second
area being subjected to a second temperature program, said second
temperature program being different from the first temperature
program, said second area of said body part being morphologically
similar to, adjacent to, but not substantially overlapping with
said first area of said body part;
(c) inserting said first set of data and said second set of
data into a mathematical relationship to calculate a mathematical
output; and
(d) comparing said mathematical output to a category
selector to determine said disease state of said human subject.
The examiner relies on the following references:
Skates et al. (Skates) 5,800,347 Sep. 1, 1998
Mills 5,978,691 Nov. 2, 1999
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9-12, 14 and 16-18 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by the disclosure of Mills.
Claims 5, 8, 13 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
As evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Mills taken alone
with respect to claims 5, 13 and 15, and Mills in view of Skates
with respect to claim 8.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007