Appeal No. 96-0957
Application 08/138,359
In use, the protruding needle 20 is inserted into the vein of a
patient and the end of the blood collection container 35 having
the penetrable closure 36 thereon is inserted into the receptacle
12 until the needle 22 penetrates the penetrable closure and the
resilient valve sheath 25 is compressed. The cylindrical wall of
the receptacle 12 is also provided with a locking/holding means
in the form of an inwardly depressible tongue 26 that engages a
lip 38 which is formed on the closure 36 for the stated purpose
of (1) preventing the blood collection container 35 from being
pushed out of the receptacle 12 by the “spring force” of the
compressed valve sheath (column 3, lines 1-6), (2) insuring
that there is an “uninterrupted blood draw” (column 3, lines 22
and 23) and (3) preventing injury to the patient by eliminating
the “constant inward pushing” of the blood collection container
35 (column 3, lines 35-40).
Thus, while both Feeney and Quaas both as a broad
proposition disclose a locking/holding means, they function
in an entirely different manner and are used in completely
different types of devices. Absent the appellant’s own
teachings, we can think of no cogent reason why one of ordinary
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007