Appeal No. 2000-0298
Application No. 08/832,013
the rejection of the claims on appeal. The examiner finds
that Chung discloses the invention substantially as claimed
except that Chung includes a biasing bladder comprised of foam
which must be flattened during insertion and then re-expanded
when the sensor is in the preferred region, as opposed to a
pre-compressed foam. The examiner has relied on the teachings
of Wood that foam can be used for a variety of medical
applications and that the use of compressed foam allows the
structures to be readily inserted into the body cavity with
subsequent expansion upon contact with body fluids. The
examiner relies on Matejcek for teaching an alternate process
for preparing contact expandable foams that includes
impregnating a foam with defatiguing agent, compressing the
foam, and allowing the foam to dry (examiner's answer at pages
3 to 4). From these teachings the examiner concludes:
It would have been obvious to modify the device and
manufacture of Chung et al. to incorporate
compressed foam formed by the method of Matejcek et
al. for the biasing bladder since this would provide
a more convenient form for insertion into the body
as taught by Wood et al. [examiner's answer at page
4].
The appellant argues that there is no suggestion to
combine the teachings of Chung with those of Wood and Matejcek
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007