Appeal No. 98-2385
Application 08/403,995
objected to until they are rewritten in independent form.
Appellants’ invention is directed to a reinforced catheter and to a method of making
such catheter. Independent claims 1 and 17 are representative of the subject matter on
appeal and a copy of those claims is attached to this decision.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Truckai 5,176,660 Jan. 5, 1993
Brown et al. (Brown) 5,334,169 Aug. 2, 1994
(filed May 11, 1992)
Claims 1 through 3, 6, 7 and 10 through 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Truckai.
Claims 1 through 3, 6 through 9, 13 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e) as being anticipated by Brown.
Rather than reiterate the examiner's full statement of the above-noted rejections and
the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and appellants regarding those
rejections, we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 13, mailed October 8,
1997) for the examiner's reasoning in support of the rejections, and to appellants’ brief
(Paper No. 12, filed September 19, 1997) for appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007