Appeal No. 98-1936
Application 08/316,933
structure (claim 21) assumes the first conformation. Likewise,
in the language of claims 5 and 24 on appeal, we see nothing
in Wiesner which teaches or discloses a medical device
comprising a polymer structure of a first polymer material
preconfigured into a first conformation (claim 5) or a
structure of a first material preconfigured into a first
conformation (claim 24) and a hydrophilic polymer material
preconfigured into a second conformation, the respective
mechanical strengths of the first material (claim 24) or first
polymer material (claim 5) and the hydrophilic polymer
material being such that the mechanical strength of the
hydrophilic polymer material exceeds that of the first
material (claim 24)
and the first polymer material (claim 5) sufficiently “so that
the polymer structure” (claim 5) and the structure of claim 24
“is in the second conformation,” wherein the hydrophilic
polymer material “is adapted to lose its mechanical strength
upon the occurrence of a triggering event” and upon loss of
said mechanical strength, the device assumes the first
conformation.
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007