== Bilski Medtech Sample ==
{|border="2" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="4" width="100%"
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''S.No'''</font>
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''Publication <nowiki> </nowiki>No.'''</font>
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''Rejection type'''</font>
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''101 rejectionRejection'''</font>|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''Why 101 rejection102 Rejection'''</font>|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''Other rejection103 Rejection'''</font>|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''101 but not mentioning as claim rejection112 Rejection'''</font>
|-
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''1'''</font>
|N/A
|N/A
|Claims 19-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being unpatentable over Chaco et al., U.S. Patent 5,822,544 in view of Lichtman et al, U.S. Patent No. 5,819,107.
|N/A
|-
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''2'''</font>
|align = "center"|US20060189976A1
|121 rejectionRejection information not available|N/A|N/A
|N/A
|N/A
|121 rejection
|The inventions are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under 35 U.S.C. 101 andlor 35 U.S.C. 11 2, first paragraph.
|-
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''3'''</font>
|102 rejection
|N/A
|Claims 1-26 and 41-54 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Goldberger et al. (US Patent Application Publication US 200610079809).
|N/A
|102 rejection
|N/A
|-
|102 rejection
|N/A
|Claims 1-3, 5, 8-1 3, 16-1 8, & 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Bradley (US 200301 39781).
|N/A
|102 rejection
|N/A
|-
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''5'''</font>
|align = "center"|US20060194724A1
|103 and 112 rejection|N/A
|N/A
|112 rejection
|N/A
|The rejection of claims 1-1 6, 44-47, 49, 50-62, 64-70 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shafik (Andrologia. 1996. 28: 151 -6) or Heiduschka et al. (Exp. Neurol. 2001. 171 : 1-10) in view of Burnett (World J. Urol, 2003.20: 337-342), US 6208894 (issued Mar 27,2001) and US 6464687 (issued Oct 15, 2002) is withdrawn in response to Applicant<nowiki>’</nowiki>s amendment to the claims and cancellation of claims 2, 7, 46, 52-70.
|The rejection of claims 2, 7,46, 52-70 under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph,<br>because the specification does not enable the invention commensurate in scope with<br>the claims is moot because the claims are canceled.
|-
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''6'''</font>
|102 rejection
|N/A
|Claims 1-12 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by<br>DiLorenzo (US 6,366,813).
|N/A
|102 rejection
|N/A
|-
|102 and 103 rejection
|N/A
|N/AClaims 1-21, 29-42, 43, and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Foley et al (US Pat: 6,167,145).|102 Claims 22-28 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being unpatentable over Foley et al (US Pat: 6,167,145) stand alone.
|N/A
|-
|102 and 103 rejection
|N/A
|N/AClaims 1, 3, 5-9, 11-14, 16, and 18-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Cohen.|102 Claims 1, 3, 6-9, 11, 12, 14, 16, and 18-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being unpatentable over Boveja, previously cited, in view of Tanagho, herein Boveja in view of Tanagho
|N/A
|-
|112, 102 and 103 rejection
|N/A
|N/AClaims 1-2,25-26,35-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by "Detection of Atrial Persistent Rhythm Based on P-wave Recognition and RR Interval Variability" (VR Zurro, AL Stelle, and J Nadal, Computers in Cardiology 1995, as cited by Applicant and hereinafter referred to as "Zurro").|112Claims 3-5,27, 102 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being obvious over Bock.|N/AClaims 24 and 34-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
|-
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''12'''</font>
|102 rejection
|N/A
|N/AClaims 1-1 3, 15-23, and 25-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Gore et al. (US 2004101 47034).|102 rejection
|N/A
|-
|102 and 103 rejection
|N/A
|N/AClaims I , 2,4, 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Becker et al. (US Patent 6,904,161 BI).|102 and Claims 3, 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being unpatentable over Becker et al (US Patent 6,904,161 B1) in view of Lee (US Patent 4,838,75).
|N/A
|-
|102 rejection
|N/A
|Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Vock et al (2003/0163287 A1)
|N/A
|102 rejection
|N/A
|-
|N/A
|N/A
|Claims 1-4, 7, 8, 11, 14, 17, 20-22, 27, 34 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being unpatentable over Hedenstrom et al. (200210058674) and Mitra et al. (W0120021102377) in further view of Gordon et al. (20040014779).
|N/A
|-
|102 rejection
|N/A
|Claims 1 and 3 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (b) as being anticipated by White et al USPN 5,782,904.
|N/A
|102 rejection
|N/A
|-
|-
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''26'''</font>
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#CCFFFF"|[[Media:US20070034215A1.pdf|US20070034215A1]]|bgcolor = "#CCFFFF"|101 rejection|bgcolor = "#CCFFFF"|Claims 1-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for nonstatutory subject matter.|bgcolor = "#CCFFFF"|The invention is ineligible because it has not been limited to a substantial practical application and a tangible result. Instructions to transmit data does not result in a practical application and lacks a tangible result. The result has to be a practical application and a tangible result.|bgcolor = "#CCFFFF"N/A|N/A|bgcolor = "#CCFFFF"| N/A
|-
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''27'''</font>
|102 rejection
|N/A
|Claims 1 - 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Rogers et al. U.S. Patent No. 6,957,107.
|N/A
|102 rejection
|N/A
|-
|102 and 103 rejection
|N/A
|N/AClaims 27, 28, 29, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Addison et al. (WO 2041075746).|102 Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 41, 42, 43, 44, 50, 51, 52, and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being unpatentable over Addison in view of Prochazka et al article (Decomposition And Reconstruction Methods In Biomedical Image De-Noising, Proc. 1 6 th <nowiki>~</nowiki>ienniaIln t. EURASIP Conference BlOSlGNAL 2002, pp. 350-352, 2002)
|N/A
|-
|102 and 103 rejection
|N/A
|N/AClaims 1-3,6-10,25-29 & 31-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Deno et al. (WO 031020364 A2).|102 and Claims 4-5 & 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being unpatentable over Deno et<br>al. (WO 031020364) in view of Frank et al. (US 5,265,615 A).
|N/A
|-
|112 and 102 rejection
|N/A
|Claims 1-1 2 and 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Saracen et al (7,362,848)
|N/A
|112 and 102 rejection|N/AClaims 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 11 2, first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
|-
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''34'''</font>
|112, 102 and 103 rejection
|N/A
|N/AClaims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Deckelbaum (U.S. Pat. No. 4,785,806).|112, 102 and Claims 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being unpatentable over Deckelbaum (U.S. Pat. No. 4,785,806) in view of Alfano et al (U.S. Pat. No. 5,293,872).|N/AClaims 3, 7, 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
|-
|align = "center" bgcolor = "#808080"|<font color="#CCFFCC">'''36'''</font>
|102 and 103 rejection
|N/A
|N/AClaims 1, 2, 8-12, 14-21, and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Funderburk (US Patent 2004101 331 64).|102 and Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being unpatentable over Funderburk in view of Polcha (US Patent Application 2005101 97554).
|N/A
|-
|102 and 103 rejection
|N/A
|N/AClaims 1-4, 6-7, 15-1 7, 19-22, 24-25, 34-36, 38, 40 and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Z-Kat (WO 20041070580) as cited by applicant.|102 Claims 5, 8-1 2, 18, 23, 26-31, 37, 39 and 41-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(a) as being unpatentable over Z-Kat as applied to claims 1 and 19 above, and further in view of Krause et al. (US Patent No. 6,711,432).
|N/A
|-