Ex parte MICHELSON - Page 2




          Appeal No. 97-2888                                                          
          Application 08/389,077                                                      




          35 U.S.C. § 103.  Claims 9-11, 24-26, 37-39 and 58-60 have                  
          been                                                                        
          allowed.  Claims 28-31 and 47-54 have been withdrawn from                   
          consideration as being directed to a nonelected invention.                  
          Claims 12 and 55-57 have been canceled.                                     
               Appellant's invention relates to an adjustable surgical                
          frame for supporting a patient on an operating table during                 
          spinal surgery.  Except for claim 27, the claims on appeal                  
          have been reproduced in "Appendix A" attached to appellant's                
          Brief (Paper No. 20).  A copy of claim 27 is appended to this               
          decision.2                                                                  
                                   THE REFERENCES                                     

          The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner              
          in rejecting the appealed claims are:                                       
          Heffington, Jr. (Heffington)       4,391,438           Jul. 05,             
          1983                                                                        
          Michelson (Michelson '943)    4,481,943           Nov. 13, 1984             


               We note the following errors in the claims on appeal: in claim 32,2                                                                     
          line 8, "said" (second occurrence) should be deleted; in claim 44, line 2,  
          after "member" (first occurrence), --and-- should be inserted.  In the event
          of further prosecution, the examiner should require correction of these     
          errors.                                                                     
                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007