Appeal No. 97-2908
Application 08/347,201
Considering first the examiner’s § 103 rejection of
claims 5, 7, 14 and 20 as being unpatentable over Zackheim in
view of either Freeman or Nicko, the examiner tacitly admits
that Zackheim does not meet the requirement of independent
claims 5 and 14 calling for an elastic member having an
incision below a puncture area, wherein the incision extends
only partially through the member to define a layer between
the incision and the puncture area, and wherein the layer
consists only of rubber. The examiner also tacitly admits
that Zackheim does not meet the requirement of independent
claim 20 calling for an elastic member having an incision
below a puncture area, wherein the incision extends only
partially through the member to define a layer
between the incision and the puncture area, and wherein the
layer is substantially resealable after the needle is
withdrawn from the container.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007