Appeal No. 1998-2777
Application 08/477,226
through 36 are all of the claims pending in the application.
Appellants’ invention relates to a method for making devices used for tissue regeneration (claim
1), which method uses computer-aided-design (CAD) in combination with solid free-form fabrication
technology to form vascularized polymeric matrix structures which can be implanted and connected to
ducts within tissue in a patient, seeded with cells, and allowed to form new tissue that is supplied with
adequate blood-borne nutrients via the predesigned vasculature. In addition, appellants’ polymeric
matrix structures or devices for tissue regeneration may be formed to have therein other predesigned
lumens and ducts for exocrine, excretory, and other functions associated with normal tissue in vivo.
Claim 16 on appeal is directed to a medical device for tissue regeneration formed in accordance with
the foregoing method. A copy of independent claims 1 and 16 can be found in the Appendix to
appellants’ brief.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Klebe 5,108,926 Apr. 28, 1992
Cima et al. (Cima ‘380) 5,387,380 Feb. 7, 1995
Claims 1 through 36 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being
indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which appellants
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007