Appeal No. 96-2266
Application 08/156,794
in place of the Thomas catheter 15, we do not consider such a
combination to be suggested by these two references, there
being no disclosure of use of the Christian tube 42 as a
catheter into a blood vessel.
Rejection (3)
This rejection will also not be sustained, since
Frankhouser, the additional reference applied, does not supply
the above-noted deficiencies of Christian and Thomas.
Conclusion
The examiner’s decision to reject claims 1 to 15, 26 and
36 to 38 is reversed.
REVERSED
IAN A. CALVERT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
JAMES M. MEISTER ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
NEAL E. ABRAMS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Ansel M. Schwartz
425 N. Craig St., Suite 301
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007