Appeal No. 97-2550
Application 08/467,698
this broad and somewhat ambiguous teaching concerning the
location of Bonutti's fluid/inflation conduit(s) would fail to
provide the factual basis necessary to support the examiner's
conjecture that the fluid/inflation conduit in the resulting
device would extend along the inner side of a sheath between
adjacent wires as required by claim 12. In other words, the
examiner has resorted to speculation, unfounded assumptions
and/or hindsight reconstruction to supply conceded
deficiencies in the reference evidence applied in support of
the rejection on appeal.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 rejection of claim 12, or of claims 13, 15, 27 and 28
which depend therefrom, as being unpatentable over Bonutti in
view of Lee.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007