Stephen T. Fan and Landa C. Fan - Page 4

                                        - 4 -                                         
          temporal mandibular disorders, implants, etc., as well as the               
          proposed treatment for these and other conditions.                          
               According to promotional materials, the system provides                
          images that “facilitate fast, accurate analysis and diagnosis” of           
          dental conditions.  Furthermore, according to the promotional               
          materials, the system “reduces the time necessary to explain                
          diagnoses and procedures and describe courses of treatment with             
          patients”.  The system has general applicability and usefulness             
          to all patients.  The promotional materials do not suggest that             
          the system was designed specifically to facilitate the treatment            
          of disabled individuals.                                                    
               Some of petitioner’s patients are hearing impaired.3  Prior            
          to purchasing the system, petitioner communicated with his                  
          hearing-impaired patients primarily through the use of                      
          handwritten notes.  He also provided educational video tapes that           
          his patients could view through the use of a VCR and television             
          set.  None of his hearing-impaired patients complained to                   
          petitioner about this method of communication.  Nevertheless,               
          petitioner found communicating in this manner to be cumbersome              
          and time consuming.  According to petitioner, the use of                    
          handwritten notes generally added about 20 minutes to an                    
          examination.  Furthermore, after each examination, the pens,                

               3 When questioned on cross-examination, petitioner refused             
          to disclose the number of hearing-impaired patients that he                 
          treated during the years in issue.                                          

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011