Appeal No. 97-4459 Page 9
Application No. 08/421,063
interpreted without hindsight reconstruction of the invention
from the prior art. The examiner may not, because of doubt
that the invention is patentable, resort to speculation,
unfounded assumption or hindsight reconstruction to supply
deficiencies in the factual basis for the rejection. See In
re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 177 (CCPA 1967),
cert. denied, 389 U.S. 1057 (1968).
With this as background, we analyze the prior art applied
by the examiner in the rejection of the claims on appeal.
Figures 4 and 5 of Sundberg are diagrammatic side views
of
a sampling device illustrating the device during suction and
pressure strokes, respectively. The sampling device is
intended to take out a sample of a cell-containing amniotic
fluid from an amniotic cavity by penetrating the wall of the
amniotic cavity by means of a hollow needle or cannula and
extracting a volume of cell-containing amniotic fluid
therethrough. The sampling device includes (1) a syringe
having a cylinder 10, a piston 11, a piston rod 12, a cone 14
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007