Appeal No. 95-2111
Application 07/771,173
We will now address the rejection of claims 1-3
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Davies. We find
Davies discloses laser apparatus comprising a laser light
generating means 21 which directs a beam of light into optical
fibers 19 (Figure 1). The optical fibers conduct laser light
to a distal end 46 terminating in a tip portion which is
adapted to divert laser light from the optical fiber in an
“annular pattern” (Figure 3). In view of the foregoing, we
find that Davies discloses each and every element of claim 1.
Appellants argue that Davies does not disclose an
apparatus that is capable of cutting precisely to the end of a
finite channel. We do not find this argument persuasive
because it is not commensurate with the actual scope of claim
1 which does not recite that the apparatus is capable of
cutting precisely to the end of a finite channel. Thus, we
will sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 1 under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Davies.
As appellants have not argued the separate
patentability of claims 2-3, these claims will stand or fall
with claim 1 and thus we will sustain the rejection as these
-12-
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007