Appeal 2006-2559
Application 10/189,476
nor claim 17 recites the use of “neovasculature characterization” or the use
of “eigenfunction decompositions” as a “higher-order measure of the at least
one biomarker,” and we hereby decline Appellants’ invitation to read such
limitations into claims 1 and 17. Thus, we do not find any reversible error in
our decision to affirm the anticipation rejection of claims 1, 8 to 14, 16, 17
and 23 to 29.
Appellants’ request for rehearing has been granted to the extent that
our decision has been reconsidered, but such request is denied with respect
to making any modifications to the decision.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
REHEARING
DENIED
KIS
BLANK ROME, L.L.P.
600 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVENUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON, DC 20037
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3
Last modified: September 9, 2013