Appeal No. 2007-0606
Application No. 10/011,338
respect to said exterior surface of said implant.
Grounds of Rejection
1. Claims 1, 10, 30-31, 34-36, 38, 40-43, 45-46, 49-50, 54-55 and 58-59
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) for anticipation over Sertich.
2. Claims 1-13, 16-22, 24-26, 33-36, 38-50, 52, and 54-59 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(e) for anticipation over Bagby.
3. Claims 1-5, 7, 10-13, 16, 18-22, 29-31, 33-36, 38-50, 52, 54-55 and 58-59.
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for anticipation over Lin in view of Michelson.
Anticipation - Sertich
Claims 1, 10, 30-31, 34-36, 38, 40-43, 45-46, 49-50, 54-55 and 58-59
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) for anticipation over Sertich.
Appellants provide separate argument for claims 35, and 41-43. We treat of
each these claims separately.
The examiner contends that "Sertich discloses a spinal implant comprising a
generally tubular shell having a plurality of pillars 70 on an exterior surface formed in a
regular array." Answer, page 3. The implant comprises a plurality of holes, elements
62 and 64. Sertich teaches the height of the impaling 30 is between 11-13 mm, wherein
from the drawings the pillars can be calculated to be within the large claimed range. Id.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013