Appeal 2006-3287
Application 10/022,996
Lam shows the configuration of the balloons after the step of mounting the
catheter. Lam, col. 6, ll. 7-11 (“Prior to deformation, the flaring portion 25
is substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis 26 of the ostial stent 20.
Upon expansion and deformation, the flaring portion is non-parallel to and at
some angle slanting away from the longitudinal axis 26 of the ostial stent
20.”). See Answer 4. Appellants correctly point out that the language of the
appealed claims requires that the long balloon and short balloon are
positioned side by side during the step of mounting the catheter, which
occurs before expansion of the balloons. See Brief, first paragraph on page
11 and paragraph bridging pages 12-13. Therefore, regardless of whether
the claim language “side by side” reads on Lam Figure 7, Lam still fails to
teach or suggest the claim 8 step of “mounting the stent on a catheter having
a long balloon and a short balloon wherein the long balloon and short
balloon are positioned side by side,” i.e., in the type of arrangement shown
in Appellants’ Figure 34.
For the foregoing reasons, I would reverse the rejection of Claims 8-
14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 on the basis that the Examiner has failed to make a
prima facie showing that the prior art teaches or suggests Appellants’
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013