Appeal No. 96-1391
Application 08/170,503
it clearly is inherently capable of applying both pressure and
reduced temperatures to the femoral
artery. It is pointed out that appellants are here claiming
apparatus, not a method of use.
With regard to claim 4, the examiner takes the
position that (answer, pp. 6 to 7):
The claimed invention recites no specified
pressure reduction rate achieved by the
quick release element. Thus, in the Exam-
iner’s view, any reduction in compressive
pressure provided by the Sconce reference
is considered to be rapid. Accordingly,
both the release of the tab fasteners [22,
26 of Sconce], even if only one is
released, and the opening of the screw cap
fittings [61 on valves 60 of Sconce] are
considered to provide a “rapid” reduction
in compressive pressure.
We agree. Although the release of Sconce’s tabs or the
opening of the opening of Sconce’s valve screw caps might not
release the pressure as fast as appellants’ disclosed quick
release valve 36, the claim is not so limited. Also, we note
that certainly the release of the last of Sconce’s tabs to be
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007