Appeal No. 2003-1470
Application No. 08/847,763
De Goicoechea contains any teaching or suggestion for modifying
the primary reference devices in the manner proposed by the
examiner and required by the appealed claims.
In this regard, we emphasize the appellants’ point that Ward
is not directed to an implantable device but instead to blood
containing vessels such as tubings and containers which include a
coating on surfaces which come into contact with the blood.
Because Ward’s vessels are not implantable devices, the
aforementioned surfaces typically are interior surfaces of the
vessel. Nevertheless, this fact does not support the examiner’s
conclusion that Ward would have suggested providing the primary
reference devices with a coating exclusively deposited on
surfaces that are incapable of contacting vessel walls. Indeed,
such a conclusion is antithetical to Ward’s teaching of treating
or coating his vessel surfaces which come into contact with blood
(e.g., see lines 52-55 in column 3). Further, this conclusion is
even more antithetical to Ward’s teaching that his invention can
also be used to treat the exterior surface of an article such as
a vessel or a tube (see lines 14-21 in column 4).
As for the De Goicoechea patent, this patent does not
support the examiner’s obviousness conclusion. On the contrary,
the teachings of this patent militate against the modification
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007