Appeal No. 1996-3547 Page 12
Application No. 08/089,854
to bone by a variety of techniques unrelated to those discussed
by de Groot.
Upon consideration of the evidence and arguments presented,
we find ourselves in agreement with the examiner's position.
Accordingly, we will sustain the examiner's rejection of claims
13-19 and 68-106 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by Jones
or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Jones.
§ 103 rejection of claim 107 over Jones in view of Spector
In addition to having a shape that is suitable for placing
the prosthetic device in contact with bone for binding thereto as
discussed above, claim 107 additionally requires that the
prosthetic device includes a polymer having a porous surface
including at least some pores having a diameter within the range
of 50 to 500 microns. According to the examiner, it would have
been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to
include pores having a diameter within the claimed range in the
polymer material of the device of Jones in view of Spector
teaching that the provision of pore sizes overlapping those
claimed in a prosthetic device is conducive to the ingrowth of
tissue including "cancellous and cortical bone spicules" (column
4, lines 24-53). In this regard, the examiner notes, in effect,
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007