Appeal No. 1997-4259
Application No. 08/259,474
112, second paragraph, as being indefinite. Our concern here
is that we find no clear basis upon which to select a given
viscosity for the filler material or the implant as a whole
based on providing a tactile response that is "substantially
the equivalent of the tactile response of a normal human
breast." Appellants apparently intend to encompass a
viscosity range of "greater than about 30 cps" (claim 2), and
more specifically preferably of between about 10,000 cps and
about 50,000 cps, in a temperature range of between about 32EC
and about 40EC (specification,
page 8). However, with regard to the filler material itself
we find no criteria for determining a conversion between
tactile response and viscosity, while for the breast implant
and/or prosthesis claimed we find no consideration of other
factors which affect the tactile response, like the material
from which the envelope is made, the thickness of such
envelope material or the degree of filling of the envelope.
Nor do we have any standards given to determine exactly what
is a tactile response that is substantially the equivalent of
the tactile response of a normal human breast, as set forth in
a number of the claims on appeal and in appellants’
18
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007