Appeal No. 96-2271
Application 07/995,047
(through which tube 4 passes) and a first means for catching onto
a tissue wall, in the form of needles 22. It further comprises
an inner part 2 having a second central opening 13 and a second
means for catching onto a tissue wall (a second set of needles
22). Elements 10 and 19, respectively, provide means for guiding
and attaching the outer part into engagement with the inner part.
Lastly, Sugarbaker discloses a central tube 4 offering access
through the device into the chamber beyond.
It is true that the Sugarbaker device is not disclosed as a
ventricular cannulation device for providing communication
through an opening in the cardiac wall, as is recited in the
preamble to the appellants' claim 1. However, while the
appellants have argued that it should be disqualified as a
reference because it is not suitable for use in a cardiac
environment, no evidence has been made of record to support such
a position. We see no reason why the Sugarbaker device, which
clearly catches both faces of bowel tissue, would not also be
capable of catching both sides of cardiac tissue. Likewise, we
see no reason why its size would not be suitable for placement in
a cardiac chamber.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007