Appeal No. 97-2888
Application 08/389,077
ordinary skill in the art at the time appellant made his
invention to use the support panels disclosed by Michelson
'892 with the surgical frame disclosed by Michelson '943 in
order to provide lateral support for the hips of a patient
during surgery.
CONCLUSION
To summarize our decision, we have affirmed the examiner's
rejections of claims 18, 20, 22, 27, 32, 35, 36 and 44-46 under
35
U.S.C. § 103, but reversed the examiner's rejection of claims
2-5, 7, 13-15, 19, 23, 33, 40 and 43 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 on
the
merits. In addition, we have reversed the examiner's rejection
of claims 1, 6, 8, 16, 17, 21, 34, 41, 42 and 61-64 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 on a procedural ground predicated upon the
indefiniteness of the claims and, pursuant to 37 CFR §
1.196(b), we have entered a new ground of rejection against
claims 1, 6, 8, 16, 17, 21, 34, 41, 42 and 61-64 under 35
U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, and claim 23 under 35 U.S.C. §
23
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007