Appeal No. 95-2960
Application 08/009,381
recited in appellants’ claim 8 would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of 35 U.S.C.
§ 103.
Appellants’ claim 12 requires that a sterile compressible
rubber tubing segment be invaded by cutting it prior to using
a hollow conductive metal tube to join end segments formed by
the cutting. The examiner argues that Popovich teaches
connection of two tube segments which have been closed off
(answer, page 5). We do not find in Popovich, however, or in
any of the other references relied upon by the examiner, a
teaching or suggestion to invade a sterile tube by cutting it.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of claims 12-14.
DECISION
The rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 15 and 16
over Smith and Isono, claims 8-10 over Smith, Isono and
Popovich,
and claim 11 over Smith, Isono, Popovich and Tenczar, are
affirmed. The rejection of claims 12-14 over Smith, Isono and
7-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007