Ex Parte Cave et al - Page 3

                Appeal 2006-2959                                                                             
                Application 10/066,277                                                                       
                      Independent claim 1 is illustrative and representative of the                          
                Appellants’ invention.  It reads as follows:                                                 
                      1.  A system operable to substantially automatically perform an                        
                evaluation of a sample of a material according to an established standard,                   
                wherein the system comprises:                                                                
                      a microscope operable to magnify the sample;                                           
                      a light source operable to illuminate the sample, wherein the                          
                illumination is provided at a grazing angle so as to enhance a contrast                      
                between surface features of the sample;                                                      
                      a stage associated with the microscope and operable to move and                        
                position the sample under the microscope for viewing;                                        
                      an image capturing mechanism operable to capture an image of the                       
                sample through the microscope; and                                                           
                      a computing device operable to control magnification by the                            
                microscope, control illumination by the light source, receive images from                    
                the image capturing device, control movement of the stage, and store and                     
                execute a computer program operable to substantially automatically                           
                conduct an analysis of the image to identify surface features of the                         
                sample and determine characteristics of the sample therefrom, and                            
                to generate a report setting forth a result of the analysis.                                 

                Appellants contend that claims 1 through 4, 6 through 8, 23 through                          
                26 and 28 are not anticipated by Esrig.1  Particularly, Appellants contend                   
                that Esrig does not fairly teach or suggest automatically analyzing an image                 
                to identify surface features of a sample under test in order to determine the                
                                                                                                            
                      1 This decision considers only those arguments that Appellants                         
                submitted in the Appeal and Reply Briefs.  Arguments that Appellants could                   
                have made but chose not to make in the Briefs are deemed to have been                        
                waived.  See 37 § C.F.R. 41.37(c)(1) (vii)(eff. Sept. 13, 2004).  See also In                
                re Watts, 354 F.3d 1362, 1368, 69 USPQ2d 1453, 1458 (Fed. Cir. 2004).                        
                                                     3                                                       

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013