Appeal No. 95-3421
Application 08/045,323
from that of Hall in that Hall does not disclose a reservoir
sleeve which is “initially held fixed apart from the tip
before use.” Rather, in the Hall apparatus, the tip 18 of
needle 12 is within the sleeve 26 before use (col. 5, lines 4
to 11). The examiner, however, contends that such a
modification of the Hall syringe would have been obvious
because (answer, pages 3 to 4):
if one were willing to forego the advantages of
having the disinfecting reservoir contact the needle
before use (i.e. assuring that the needle is sterile
before use) as does Hall, it would have been obvious
to one of ordinary skill in the art to “fix” or
maintain the sleeve away from the needle until after
use.
Also, referring to the needle guard disclosed by Boese and the
lockable spring/cover of Spier, the examiner asserts that
(answer, page 4):
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
in the art to use the retraction/extension system of
either Spier et al or Boese in the invention of Hall
when one did not wish the sleeve 26 to come into
contact with the needle until after use or if it
were felt that the sleeve would interfere with use
if not in a locked retracted position during use.
After fully considering the record in light of the
arguments presented in appellant's brief and the examiner's
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007